IMS 2026 Conference Intelligence

1/ Is etentamig replacing Tec/Elran? My take: no, but it adds a real option. Thoughts on #CERVINO from #IMS26👇 2/ Ph3, N=393, triple-class exposed, BCMA-naive, 2+ prior lines. Etentamig Q4W vs Kd/SVd/EPd. ORR 74 vs 46%, ≥CR 40 vs 7%, PFS HR 0.40. Median f/u 11.4 mo. 3/ The https://t.co/DmgXrddbeD

967 impressions · View post on X →

5/ An encouraging early OS signal also emerged: 🔹HR 0.48 🔹12-month OS: 87.9% vs 72.0% 🔹Median OS: not reached in either arm However, the prespecified OS efficacy boundary was not crossed, and longer follow-up is required. #mmsm #myeloma #IMS26 #IMS2026 #USMIRC #MedEd https://t.co/ahz9To9kTr

135 impressions · View post on X →

4/ MRD negativity among evaluable patients achieving ≥CR was striking: 🔹MRD <10⁻⁵: 89.1% vs 25.0% 🔹MRD <10⁻⁶: 82.8% vs 12.5% Important caveat: the SAT comparison included only 8 evaluable patients versus 64 with etentamig. #mmsm #myeloma #IMS26 #IMS2026 #USMIRC #MedEd https://t.co/DUjaggV2H5

113 impressions · View post on X →

1/🧵 Phase III CERVINO: Could etentamig redefine BCMA×CD3 bispecific therapy in RRMM? The results show impressive efficacy, deep responses, convenient monthly dosing—and a potentially differentiated CRS profile. Etentamig is a second-generation BCMA×CD3 bispecific with: https://t.co/MRWdTiBRnN

1.5K impressions · View post on X →

Hira Mian@HiraSMian

We see it again today, low low rates of CRS with etentamig #IMS26 https://t.co/8qj6L8RDBu

689 impressions · View post on X →

CERVINO takes relapsed myeloma to new heights: etentamig delivers remarkable efficacy with a reassuring safety profile. A true peak performance! #IMS2026 @TheIACH https://t.co/XPkIvB5DpY

1.6K impressions · View post on X →

Mount Sinai Tisch Cancer Center@TischCancer

.@myelomatips presents tomorrow at #IMS26: “Etentamig Combined With Pomalidomide Plus Dexamethasone in Relapsed/Refractory #MultipleMyeloma After 1-3 Prior Lines of Therapy: A Phase 1b Dose-Escalation and Safety Expansion Study” @IcahnMountSinai @Myeloma_Society https://t.co/eogEkouTp3

120 impressions · View post on X →

Pablo Tenorio Feixas@ptenfei

@Myeloma_Society Safety and TEAEs profile are also reassuring: - Single step-up dose: 28.3% CRS, mostly grade 1; no grade ≥3 - ICANS: 0.9% - Grade 3/4 infections: 27.7% vs 19.2% - Grade 5 infections: 1.5% vs 3.1% - AE-related discontinuation: 3.6% vs 9.6% https://t.co/FI1smEdiEa

13 impressions · View post on X →

#IMS26 Plenary presentation for CERVINO demonstrates clear superiority of TCEs over SOC! 👏👏@PlasmaCellPete @myelomaMD et al. 12-mo PFS of 62.1% with Etentamig vs. 28.4% with control (Kd, SVd, EloPd) OS showing encouraging trend as well! Surely no more non TCE control arms https://t.co/uJfngfYOza

724 impressions · View post on X →

Pablo Tenorio Feixas@ptenfei

@Myeloma_Society Responses also appeared deeper and more durable: - 12-month DoR was 79.6% vs 48.1%, while median DoR was not reached with etentamig. - Among evaluable patients achieving ≥CR, MRD negativity reached 89.1% at 10-5 and 82.8% at 10-5. - Early OS signal also favoured etentamig. https://t.co/5Az60eUFtc

84 impressions · View post on X →

MajesTEC-3

10 slides Full trial profile →

CARTITUDE-4ImmunoPRISMMajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MonumenTAL-3RedirecTT-1

Samer Al Hadidi, MD,MS,FACP (@HadidiSamer) — #IMS26 — Pillars of infection prevention in patients receiving T-cell redirecting therapies

#IMS26 #mmsm Infections with BsAn and CAR-T therapies https://t.co/nGIR6yJM9B

Henry C Fung| MM, lymphoma, leukemia & CART@HenrychihangFu1

[Slide 1 - Incidence and severity of infections across different approved BsAbs and CAR T trials, cross-trial compilation table] BsAbs late-line relapse (triple-class exposed) - trial/drug/All grade/Grade 3-4/Grade 5: MajesTEC-1/Teclistamab: 78.8% / 55.2% / 12.7%. MagnetisMM-3/Elranatamab: 69.9% / 39.8% / 6.5%. LinkerMM-1/Linvoseltamab: 75% / 48% / NR. MonumenTAL-1/Talquetamab: 66.2% / 14.5% / 1.4%. RedirecTT-1/Tec-Tal: 89% / 64% / 12%. BsAbs early-line relapse (1-3 prior lines): MajesTEC-9/Teclistamab: 82.8% / 41.6% / 5.5%. MajesTEC-3/Tec-Dara: 96.5% / 41.6% / 5.5%. MonumenTAL-3/Tal-Dara: 83.0% / 29.2% / 1.5%. MonumenTAL-3/Tal-Dara-Pom: 84.3% / 37.7% / 0.7%. CAR T late-line relapse: CARTITUDE-1/Cilta-Cel: All grade 58%, Gr3-4 20%, Gr5 NR. KarMMa/Ide-Cel: 69%, 22%, NR (#, deaths from AEs not otherwise specified 7% total). CAR T early-line relapse: CARTITUDE-4/Cilta-Cel: 59%, 24%, 4%. KarMMa-3/Ide-Cel: 56%, 22%, NR (*, death from AEs 6% total). "Infections remain a major safety concern with T-cell-redirecting therapies, particularly with continuous bispecific antibody treatment." Table provided for ease of viewing, no comparisons intended. Sources: Moreau P et al NEJM 2022; Lesokhin AM et al Nat Med 2023;29(9):2259-2267; Lee HC et al Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2026 Feb, 26(2):e201-e212,e8; Chari A et al NEJM 2022; Cohen Y et al Engl J Med 2025;392:138-49; Touzeau C et al N Engl J Med 2026;395:440-53; Costa LJ et al N Eng J Med 2026;394:739-52; Mina R et al N Engl J Med 2026;395:671-83; Einsele H et al, Lancet Oncol 2026;27:254-68; Ailawadhi S et al, Blood 2024 (144)23; Berdeja J et al, Lancet 2021;398:314-24; Munshi NC et al, N Engl J Med 2021 Feb 25;384(8):705-716. [Slide 2 - Pillars of infection prevention in patients receiving T-cell redirecting therapies] Table: Immune defect/risk -> Type of infection -> Preventive strategy. Lymphopenia/Neutropenia -> Bacterial infections/PJP, approx first 3-6 months -> Antiviral + PJP prophylaxis, G-CSF support. Immunosuppressive therapy (steroids, IL-6 blockage, cyclophosphamide) -> Bacterial infections/Sepsis/fungal infections/CMV -> Consider antibacterial/antifungal. B-cell aplasia/Hypogammaglobulinemia -> Bacterial/Viral (Respiratory virus, VZV/HSV)/CMV -> Immunoglobulin replacement, Vaccination. T-cell dysfunction -> Other opportunistic infections, Viral infections, fungal (in selected high risk patients) -> Fixed treatment duration/Schedule optimization. Sources: Rodriguez-Otero P et al, Lancet Oncology May 2024; O'Neill C, et al. eJHaem. 2023;4:811-822; Friedrich MJ, et al. Cancer Cell. 2023;41:711-725.e6; Frerichs KA et al, Blood Advances 2024; Mohan M et al, Blood Cancer Journal (2025) 15:74; Tix T et al, Molecular Therapy (2025)33:7; Richardson T et al, Blood Advances (2025) 9:6; Nath K et al, Blood Cancer Journal (2024) 14:88; Reynolds G et al, Blood advances (2023) 7:19; Banerjee R et al, Blood Advances (2025) 9:18; Dr Rodriguez Otero personal opinion.

🚨 A model cannot fast-forward 15 years of follow-up. PERSEUS: projected median PFS 17.1 years. MajesTEC-3: projected median OS 18.5 years. These are extrapolations from approximately 4 and 3 years of median follow-up. Accuracy at the projected horizon remains unestablished. https://t.co/LWeCdf9hyo https://t.co/PPuqMJomFR

MajesTEC-3PERSEUS

2.4K impressions · View post on X →

#IMS26 Elegant (post hoc) MajesTEC-3 analysis by @End_myeloma Unlike other myeloma drugs, I bet real-world tec-dara OS will look *better* than MajesTEC-3 did. Why? Because we now know PPx toci, PPx IVIG, etc - early BsAb deaths can be prevented, vs fatal PD with Dara-Pd can't. https://t.co/PjU0eGrzSQ

2.5K impressions · View post on X →

MajesTEC-3: Time-Stratified Cox Analysis of OS Curve (Surviving %, Tec-Dara vs DPd/DVd, 0-45 months): >10 months: HR, 0.22 (95% CI, 0.13-0.38) ≤10 months: HR, 1.08 (95% CI, 0.64-1.81) Deaths within first 10 months were comparable: 29 Tec-Dara vs 29 DPd/DVd Overall HR, 0.46 (95% CI, 0.32-0.65); P<0.0001 Cause of death within first 10 months (curve cross): Tec-Dara: AEs (n=18), PD (n=5), 'Other' (n=6) DPd/DVd: AEs (n=8), PD (n=20), 'Other' (n=1) Tec-Dara substantially reduced the risk of death by 78% versus DPd/DVd after 10 months Of 18 AE deaths, 12 were infections. 3 patients died due to unknown reasons; 3 occurred outside the TEAE reporting window (n=1, unrelated to study treatment [COVID-19 occurring >30 days after last dose]; n=1, death occurred after initiation of subsequent therapy [septic shock]; n=1, death following diagnosis of secondary amyloidosis). 1 patient died due to unknown reasons. TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event. Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland (slide 13)

Very interesting Competing-Risk analysis of MajesTEC-3 presented by @End_myeloma at #IMS26 . Tec-Dara OS benefit driven by suppression of disease progression while NRM remains comparable over time. https://t.co/nxIZ0GDYk6

585 impressions · View post on X →

Why Competing-Risk Analyses Matter in MajesTEC-3 - NRM and disease progression are mutually exclusive components of PFS - NRM: Death without prior progression, irrespective of cause - NRM and disease progression are also "competing events," requiring separation - A patient who experiences 1 event can no longer experience the other event - Competing-risk analyses (cumulative incidence of progression [CIP] and NRM) are needed to accurately assess what is driving patient survival in MajesTEC-3 Flowchart: "2 possible routes" -> "Alive/on study" splits into: (left) Death after disease progression -> Disease progression (counted toward CIP) -> Subsequent therapy -> Death (right) No prior progression (NRM) -> Death without prior progression (counted toward NRM) Banner: Competing-risk analyses help to separate "deaths after progression" from "deaths without prior progression" Footnotes: aPFS event (defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of first documented disease progression or death due to any cause, whichever comes first). PFS combines progression and death into a single endpoint but cannot distinguish between them. bOS event (defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the patient's death due to any cause). OS captures all deaths but cannot distinguish deaths after progression from deaths without prior progression (NRM). Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland 5 MajesTEC-3: Causes of Non-Relapse Mortality NRM was primarily due to AEs in both treatment groups - AEs were primarily infections and infestations, occurring most commonly within 6 months of treatment initiation - Tec-Dara: 12; 11 ≤6 months(a) - DPd/DVd: 4; 2 ≤6 months - Infection prophylaxis was recommended per protocol,(1) with IgRT and antimicrobial use reinforced as experience and guidelines evolved - Supportive RWE and IMWG guidelines recommend IgRT prophylaxis for the reduction of high-grade infections with BCMA-targeting BsAbs(2-5) Table - NRM, n | Tec-Dara (n=28) | DPd/DVd (n=26): AE-related(b): 19 | 16 Infections and infestations: 12 | 4 General disorders and administration-site conditions: 2 | 4 Respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders: 2 | 3 Nervous system disorders: 1 | 2 Hepatobiliary disorders: 1 | 1 Cardiac disorders: 1 | 0 Immune system disorders: 1 | 0 Neoplasms benign, malignant, and unspecified (including cysts and polyps): 0 | 1 Gastrointestinal disorders: 0 | 1 PD without IRC-determined progression: 2 | 8 Other: 7 | 2 Banner: Infection-related NRM may be reduced through diligent use of established IgRT and antimicrobial prophylaxis protocols Footnotes: aOnly 3 out of 11 Tec-Dara patients received ≥1 dose of IgRT. bListed per System Organ Class. Of note, patients may have been listed as having more than 1 cause of death, which may have been due to 1 or more system organ class. AE, adverse event; BsAb, bispecific antibody; IgRT, immunoglobulin replacement therapy; PD, progressive disease; RWE, real-world evidence. 1. Costa LJ, et al. N Engl J Med. 2026;394(8):739-752. 2. Smits F, et al. Blood Cancer J. 2026;16(1):26. 3. Lancman G, et al. Blood Cancer Discov. 2023;4(6):440-451. 4. Cheruvalath H, et al. Blood. 2024;144(Supp 1):256. 5. Rodriguez-Otero P, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2024;25(5):e205-e216. Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland 9 MajesTEC-3: Time-Stratified Cox Analysis of OS Kaplan-Meier style survival curve (Surviving, % vs Time, months 0-45), two arms: Tec-Dara (red) and DPd/DVd (black) >10 months: HR, 0.22 (95% CI, 0.13-0.38) ≤10 months: HR, 1.08 (95% CI, 0.64-1.81) Deaths within first 10 months were comparable: 29 Tec-Dara vs 29 DPd/DVd Overall: HR, 0.46 (95% CI, 0.32-0.65); P<0.0001 Cause of death within first 10 months (curve cross): - Tec-Dara: AEs (n=18),(a) PD (n=5), "Other" (n=6)(b) - DPd/DVd: AEs (n=8), PD (n=20), "Other" (n=1)(c) Banner: Tec-Dara substantially reduced the risk of death by 78% versus DPd/DVd after 10 months Footnotes: aOf 18 AE deaths, 12 were infections. b3 patients died due to unknown reasons; 3 occurred outside the TEAE reporting window (n=1, unrelated to study treatment [COVID-19 occurring >30 days after last dose]; n=1, death occurred after initiation of subsequent therapy [septic shock]; n=1, death following diagnosis of secondary amyloidosis). c1 patient died due to unknown reasons. TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event. Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland 13 Conclusions - Tec-Dara significantly improved PFS (HR, 0.17) and OS (HR, 0.46) over DPd/DVd in patients with RRMM and 1-3 prior LOTs,(1,2) with a sustained plateau in survival curves - With Tec-Dara, progressions became uncommon after 6 months, with an unparalleled reduction in disease progression (sHR, 0.10), which is the leading cause of mortality in RRMM(3) - There was no meaningful difference in NRM between treatments over time; infection-related NRM occurred with both treatments - Infections can be better managed now with guideline-based IgRT and antimicrobial prophylaxis(4) - OS benefit with Tec-Dara versus DPd/DVd was driven by durable disease control without an increase in NRM - Superior OS with Tec-Dara was supported by RMST(1) and time-stratified Cox analysis (>10 months) Banner: Tec-Dara's OS benefit is driven by profound suppression of disease progression, while NRM remains comparable over time 1. Costa LJ, et al. N Engl J Med. 2026;394(8):739-752. 2. Mateos MV, et al. Presented at: 67th ASH Annual Meeting and Exposition; December 6-9, 2025; Orlando, FL. Oral LBA-6. 3. Tan CR, et al. Blood Adv. 2026;10(9):2937-2946. 4. Rodriguez-Otero P, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2024;25(5):e205-e216. Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland 14

#IMS26 Worth highlighting since pts with MM often aged 70+. We don't need OS plateau if myeloma remains in remission & no excess long-term mortality versus general population. Excellent 'functional cure' MajesTEC-3 data for tec-dara - I hope time-limited BsAb can replicate! https://t.co/uXn3UHkYPd

4.2K impressions · View post on X →

Model Estimates of Mortality Risk With Tec-Dara Bullet: Across tested models,[a] estimated statistical cure fractions were consistently high with Tec-Dara,[b] and low with DPd/DVd Table - Statistical cure fraction, % | Tec-Dara | DPd/DVd Best-fit model (95% CI)[c,d] | 86.6 (81-91) | 0 (0-53) Range across tested models | 84.4 to 86.8 | 0 to 51.3 Right chart "Relative survival[e]": line chart, y-axis "Relative survival, %" 0-100, x-axis "Time (years)" 0-25. Tec-Dara line (blue) plateaus near 87% out to 25 years, annotated "Statistical cure fraction 86.6%" (green triangle marker ~86.6%). DPd/DVd line (gray) declines steadily from 100% to about 5% by 25 years. Black banner: ~87% of patients treated with Tec-Dara are estimated to have no excess long-term mortality risk on top of the general population by best-fit models Footnote: aTested models analyzed survival related to excess risk in the uncured fraction using 7 classical parametric models including exponential, Weibull, lognormal, loglogistic, Gompertz, gamma, and generalized gamma. bResults from the Gompertz function were excluded for Tec-Dara because it resulted in a non-zero ceiling in excess mortality due to the shape parameter being negative. cBest-fit models were selected according to statistical goodness of fit criteria; MCMs applied the exponential function for Tec-Dara OS and DPd/DVd OS. dProfile-likelihood 95% CIs shown here; these replace the Wald CIs reported in the abstract and typically provide more accurate coverage. eFrom best-fit model. Presented by NWCJ van de Donk at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland [Slide 11]

@End_myeloma on MajesTEC-3 competing-risk analysis at #IMS26: Tec-Dara vs DPd/DVd in RRMM, 1–3 prior LOTs • Progression sHR 0.10 • NRM similar (28 vs 26) • OS HR 0.22 after 10 mo Early infection deaths → IgRT + antimicrobial prophylaxis is a must. #mmsm @Myeloma_Society https://t.co/J9QwgmmdCZ

514 impressions · View post on X →

Why Competing-Risk Analyses Matter in MajesTEC-3 - NRM and disease progression are mutually exclusive components of PFS - NRM: Death without prior progression, irrespective of cause - NRM and disease progression are also 'competing events,' requiring separation - A patient who experiences 1 event can no longer experience the other event - Competing-risk analyses (cumulative incidence of progression [CIP] and NRM) are needed to accurately assess what is driving patient survival in MajesTEC-3 Flow diagram: '2 possible routes' -> Alive/on study -> [left] Death after disease progression -> Disease progression (counted toward CIP) -> Subsequent therapy -> Death; [right] No prior progression (NRM) -> Death without prior progression (counted toward NRM) Banner: 'Competing-risk analyses help to separate "deaths after progression" from "deaths without prior progression"' MajesTEC-3: Causes of Non-Relapse Mortality NRM was primarily due to AEs in both treatment groups - AEs were primarily infections and infestations, occurring most commonly within 6 months of treatment initiation - Tec-Dara: 12; 11 <=6 months(a) - DPd/DVd: 4; 2 <=6 months - Infection prophylaxis was recommended per protocol, with IgRT and antimicrobial use reinforced as experience and guidelines evolved - Supportive RWE and IMWG guidelines recommend IgRT prophylaxis for the reduction of high-grade infections with BCMA-targeting BsAbs Table - NRM, n | Tec-Dara (n=28) | DPd/DVd (n=26): AE-related(b): 19 | 16 Infections and infestations: 12 | 4 General disorders and administration-site conditions: 2 | 4 Respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders: 2 | 3 Nervous system disorders: 1 | 2 Hepatobiliary disorders: 1 | 1 Cardiac disorders: 1 | 0 Immune system disorders: 1 | 0 Neoplasms benign, malignant, and unspecified (including cysts and polyps): 0 | 1 Gastrointestinal disorders: 0 | 1 PD without IRC-determined progression: 2 | 8 Other: 7 | 2 Banner: 'Infection-related NRM may be reduced through diligent use of established IgRT and antimicrobial prophylaxis protocols' Conclusions - Tec-Dara significantly improved PFS (HR, 0.17) and OS (HR, 0.46) over DPd/DVd in patients with RRMM and 1-3 prior LOTs, with a sustained plateau in survival curves - With Tec-Dara, progressions became uncommon after 6 months, with an unparalleled reduction in disease progression (sHR, 0.10), which is the leading cause of mortality in RRMM - There was no meaningful difference in NRM between treatments over time; infection-related NRM occurred [text cut off at right edge of photo] - Infections can be better managed now with guideline-based IgRT and antimicrobial prophylaxis - OS benefit with Tec-Dara versus DPd/DVd was driven by durable disease control without an increase in N[RM, cut off] - Superior OS with Tec-Dara was supported by RMST and time-stratified Cox analysis (>10 months) Banner: 'Tec-Dara's OS benefit is driven by profound suppression of disease progression, while NRM remains comparable over time' Citations (partially legible): 1. Costa LJ, et al. N Engl J Med...394(8):739-752. 2. Mateos MV, et al. Presented at 67th ASH Annual Meeting and Exposition; December 6-9, 2025; Orlando, FL. Oral LBA-6. 3. Tan CR, et al. Blood Adv. 2026;10(5):2937-2946. 4. Rodriguez-Otero P, et al. ... 2026;25(5):e255-e218 Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2025; Glasgow, Scotland [year on footer reads 2025, likely a typo for 2026]

#IMS26 #mmsm Oral MajesTEC-3 post hoc analysis @End_myeloma ➡️Tec-Dara reduced the risk of death by 78% versus DPd/DVd after 10 months with similar early deaths Better AEs management will help further mitigate higher risk of infection early on Moving forward this should change to time limited therapy given excellent results and depth of response

69 impressions · View post on X →

MajesTEC-3: Causes of Non-Relapse Mortality NRM was primarily due to AEs in both treatment groups AEs were primarily infections and infestations, occurring most commonly within 6 months of treatment initiation - Tec-Dara: 12; 11 ≤6 months - DPd/DVd: 4; 2 ≤6 months Infection prophylaxis was recommended per protocol, with IgRT and antimicrobial use reinforced as experience and guidelines evolved Supportive RWE and IMWG guidelines recommend IgRT prophylaxis for the reduction of high-grade infections with BCMA-targeting BsAbs Table - NRM, n | Tec-Dara (n=28) | DPd/DVd (n=26) AE-related: 19 | 16 Infections and infestations: 12 | 4 General disorders and administration-site conditions: 2 | 4 Respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders: 2 | 3 Nervous system disorders: 1 | 2 Hepatobiliary disorders: 1 | 1 Cardiac disorders: 1 | 0 Immune system disorders: 1 | 0 Neoplasms benign, malignant, and unspecified (including cysts and polyps): 0 | 1 Gastrointestinal disorders: 0 | 1 PD without IRC-determined progression: 2 | 8 Other: 7 | 2 Infection-related NRM may be reduced through diligent use of established IgRT and antimicrobial prophylaxis protocols Only 3 out of 11 Tec-Dara patients received ≥1 dose of IgRT. Listed per System Organ Class. Of note, patients may have been listed as having more than 1 cause of death, which may have been due to 1 or more system organ class. AE, adverse event; BsAb, bispecific antibody; IgRT, immunoglobulin replacement therapy; PD, progressive disease; RWE, real-world evidence. 1. Costa LJ, et al. N Engl J Med. 2026;394(8):739-752. 2. Smits F, et al. Blood Cancer J. 2026;16(1):26. 3. Lancman G, et al. Blood Cancer Discov. 2023;4(6):440-451. 4. Cheruvalath H, et al. Blood. 2024;144(Supp 1):256. 5. Rodriguez-Otero P, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2024;25(5):e205-e216. Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland (slide 9) MajesTEC-3: Non-Relapse Mortality With CIP as a competing risk, NRM was similar between treatments Deaths without progression - Tec-Dara: 28/291; 19 due to AEs - DPd/DVd: 26/296; 16 due to AEs NRM was similar between groups regardless of early AE-related deaths Cumulative incidence of non-relapse mortality curve (Tec-Dara vs DPd/DVd, 0-48 months): sHR, 1.16 (95% CI, 0.69-1.98); nominal P=0.5668 36-mo NRM rate: DPd/DVd 10.2%, Tec-Dara 9.0% No. at risk - Tec-Dara: 291 256 245 238 231 221 99 9 0 (at 0,6,12,18,24,30,36,42,48 months); DPd/DVd: 295 228 175 145 123 98 32 4 0 Censored - Tec-Dara: 0 9 10 10 13 19 140 230 239; DPd/DVd: 0 5 5 5 5 12 70 95 99 No meaningful difference between Tec-Dara and DPd/DVd in NRM Rate of dying from non-relapse causes when taking into consideration that patients who experience disease progression first are no longer 'at risk' of NRM. In the Tec-Dara group, 12 out of 19 AEs were infections; in the DPd/DVd group, 4 out of 16 were infections. Other NRM deaths included deaths attributed to progressive disease without IRC-determined progression (Tec-Dara, n=2; DPd/DVd, n=8) and 'Other' (Tec-Dara, n=7; DPd/DVd, n=2). Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland (slide 10) MajesTEC-3: Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST) OS Pre-planned RMST analysis supported an OS benefit with Tec-Dara versus DPd/DVd Tec-Dara increased average survival time through 34.1 months post-randomization (nominal P=0.0088) RMST is an alternative, clinically interpretable measure of treatment effect, particularly when proportional hazards are not met Calculated as area under the KM curve up to a prespecified time point (tau) Curve (Probability of patients being alive, 0-48 months): tau= 34.1 mo; Tec-Dara additional average survival time with Tec-Dara vs DPd/DVd HR, 0.46 (95% CI, 0.32-0.65); P<0.0001 RMST: P=0.0088 RMST demonstrated consistent OS benefit with Tec-Dara versus DPd/DVd 34.1 months represents the smaller value of the longest OS event time observed from either arm at the time of clinical cut-off (Tec-Dara, 34.1 months; DPd/DVd, 41.4 months). The estimated average survival time through 34.1 months was 30.3 months for Tec-Dara and 28.2 months for DPd/DVd; RMST difference was 2.15 months, thus favoring Tec-Dara. KM, Kaplan-Meier. 1. Costa LJ, et al. N Engl J Med. 2026;394(8):739-752. 2. Mateos MV, et al. Presented at: 67th ASH Annual Meeting and Exposition; December 6-9, 2025; Orlando, FL. Oral LBA-6. Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland (slide 12) MajesTEC-3: Time-Stratified Cox Analysis of OS Curve (Surviving %, Tec-Dara vs DPd/DVd, 0-45 months): >10 months: HR, 0.22 (95% CI, 0.13-0.38) ≤10 months: HR, 1.08 (95% CI, 0.64-1.81) Deaths within first 10 months were comparable: 29 Tec-Dara vs 29 DPd/DVd Overall HR, 0.46 (95% CI, 0.32-0.65); P<0.0001 Cause of death within first 10 months (curve cross): Tec-Dara: AEs (n=18), PD (n=5), 'Other' (n=6) DPd/DVd: AEs (n=8), PD (n=20), 'Other' (n=1) Tec-Dara substantially reduced the risk of death by 78% versus DPd/DVd after 10 months Of 18 AE deaths, 12 were infections. 3 patients died due to unknown reasons; 3 occurred outside the TEAE reporting window (n=1, unrelated to study treatment [COVID-19 occurring >30 days after last dose]; n=1, death occurred after initiation of subsequent therapy [septic shock]; n=1, death following diagnosis of secondary amyloidosis). 1 patient died due to unknown reasons. TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event. Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland (slide 13)

#IMS26 #mmsm Oral MajesTEC-3 post hoc analysis @End_myeloma ➡️ In Tec-Dara, progressions became uncommon after 6 months, with an reduction in disease progression (sHR, 0.10), which is the leading cause of mortality in RRMM https://t.co/jctyzj62b3

368 impressions · View post on X →

MajesTEC-3: Study Design Phase 3, multicenter, open-label trial conducted in 150 sites across 20 countries. Key inclusion criteria: - RRMM - 1-3 prior LOTs including a PI and lenalidomide - Patients with only 1 prior LOT must have been lenalidomide refractory per IMWG criteria - ECOG PS score of 0-2 Key exclusion criteria: - Prior BCMA-directed therapy - Refractory to anti-CD38 mAbs 1:1 randomization N=587 (22 Oct 2021 to 29 Sept 2023) -> Tec-Dara N=291, SC dosing following Dara schedule -> DPd/DVd N=296, by investigator's choice Primary endpoint: PFS per IRC Key secondary endpoints: >=CR and ORR; MRD negativity (10^-5); OS; MySIm-Q Total Symptom score Other secondary endpoints: Safety; PK and immunogenicity Fully immunotherapy-based Tec-Dara regimen with a steroid-sparing schedule after Cycle 1 Day 8 and monthly dosing after 6 cycles Footnotes: Prior exposure to anti-CD38 mAbs was permitted. During the COVID-19 pandemic. DPd/DVd were administered per the approved schedules. Response and disease progression were assessed by a blinded IRC per IMWG criteria. Dexamethasone, acetaminophen, and diphenhydramine pre-medication was required for the first 2 weeks; subsequent dexamethasone was not required thereafter. BCMA, B-cell maturation antigen; CR, complete response; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; IMWG, International Myeloma Working Group; IRC, independent review committee; mAbs, monoclonal antibodies; MRD, minimal residual disease; MySIm-Q, Multiple Myeloma Symptom and Impact Questionnaire; ORR, overall response rate; PI, proteasome inhibitor; PK, pharmacokinetics; SC, subcutaneous. 1. Costa LJ, et al. N Engl J Med. 2026;394(8):739-752. Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland 4 Why Competing-Risk Analyses Matter in MajesTEC-3 - NRM and disease progression are mutually exclusive components of PFS - NRM: Death without prior progression, irrespective of cause - NRM and disease progression are also "competing events," requiring separation - A patient who experiences 1 event can no longer experience the other event - Competing-risk analyses (cumulative incidence of progression [CIP] and NRM) are needed to accurately assess what is driving patient survival in MajesTEC-3 [Flow diagram] Alive/on study -> 2 possible routes: "Death after disease progression" (purple person icon) or "No prior progression (NRM)" (red person icon) Death after disease progression -> Disease progression (counted toward CIP) -> Subsequent therapy -> Death No prior progression (NRM) -> Death without prior progression (counted toward NRM) Competing-risk analyses help to separate "deaths after progression" from "deaths without prior progression" Footnotes: PFS event (defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of first documented disease progression or death due to any cause, whichever comes first). PFS combines progression and death into a single endpoint but cannot distinguish between them. OS event (defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of the patient's death due to any cause). OS captures all deaths but cannot distinguish deaths after progression from deaths without prior progression (NRM). Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland 5 Statistical Analysis Table with 3 columns: Primary analysis: PFS and OS HR with 95% CIs from stratified Cox regression model Stratified log-rank test Competing-risk analyses: CIP and NRM Cumulative incidence of progression (CIP): Progression with NRM as competing risk Non-relapse mortality (NRM): Death with progression as competing risk Fine-Gray sub-distribution HRs (sHR) and Gray's test Expanded analyses: OS Restricted mean survival time: Applied when proportional hazards were not met, per SAP Piecewise analysis: Time-stratified Cox analysis (<=10 months vs >10 months) Complementary competing-risk analyses allow for a more accurate interpretation of long-term survival Footnotes: Per IRC. CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; SAP, statistical analysis plan. Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland 6 MajesTEC-3: Cumulative Incidence of Progression With NRM as a competing risk, CIP was substantially lower with Tec-Dara - Progression: - Tec-Dara: 24/291; 18 with subsequent death - DPd/DVd: 171/296; 72 with subsequent death Cumulative Incidence of Progression curve, x-axis Time (months) 0-48, y-axis Cumulative incidence of disease progression 0.00-1.00: sHR, 0.10 (95% CI, 0.07-0.16); nominal P<0.0001 36-mo CIP rate: DPd/DVd 62.1%; Tec-Dara 8.7% Number at risk table: Tec-Dara: 291, 253, 241, 231, 223, 214, 89, 9, 0 (months 0,6,12,18,24,30,36,42,48) DPd/DVd: 295, 224, 169, 136, 112, 87, 27, 3, 0 Censored: Tec-Dara: 0,12,14,17,21,26,150,230,239 DPd/DVd: 0,9,11,14,16,23,75,96,99 Tec-Dara substantially reduced CIP versus DPd/DVd; progression is uncommon with 90% reduction versus DPd/DVd Footnotes: Rate of disease progression when accounting for the fact that patients who die prior to progression cannot go on to experience disease progression. Based on sHR. Presented by LJ Costa at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland 8

#IMS26 #mmsm Oral- % of functional cure with the use of Tec-Dara @Myeloma_Society Estimated functional cure of 87% with Tec-Dara showing excellent promise of such therapy. ➡️Future will need time limited therapy (Stop and see what will happen) ➡️Assess cumulative toxicity https://t.co/A9wwWJ8UC4

1.9K impressions · View post on X →

Model Estimates of Median OS for Tec-Dara Left: "Estimated all-cause survival" plot, x-axis Time (years) 0-25, y-axis All-cause survival % 0-100. Blue box annotation "MajesTEC-3: ~3yr follow-up" pointing to early portion of curves. Three curves: General population (black dashed), Tec-Dara (red/orange solid), DPd/DVd (grey solid, steepest decline). Right: "Estimated median survival" bar/arrow chart: General population: 21.1 years Tec-Dara: 18.5 years DPd/DVd: 4.9 years The model projects substantially longer median OS with Tec-Dara, approaching the matched general-population estimate Footnotes: Median follow-up: 34.5 months. Determined using the best-fit relative survival MCM. Determined using the best-fit relative survival model without cure. Presented by NWCJ van de Donk at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland 10 Model Estimates of Mortality Risk With Tec-Dara - Across tested models, estimated statistical cure fractions were consistently high with Tec-Dara, and low with DPd/DVd Table - Statistical cure fraction, %: Tec-Dara DPd/DVd Best-fit model (95% CI): 86.6 (81-91) 0 (0-53) Range across tested models: 84.4 to 86.8 0 to 51.3 Right: "Relative survival" plot, x-axis Time (years) 0-25, y-axis Relative survival % 0-100. Two curves: Tec-Dara (blue, plateauing near 86-90%, annotated "Statistical cure fraction 86.6%"); DPd/DVd (grey, declining toward 0 by ~20-25 years). ~87% of patients treated with Tec-Dara are estimated to have no excess long-term mortality risk on top of the general population by best-fit models Footnotes: Tested models analyzed survival related to excess risk in the uncured fraction using 7 classical parametric models including exponential, Weibull, lognormal, loglogistic, Gompertz, gamma, and generalized gamma. Results from the Gompertz function were excluded for Tec-Dara because it resulted in a non-zero ceiling in excess mortality due to the shape parameter being negative. Best-fit models were selected according to statistical goodness of fit criteria; MCMs applied the exponential function for Tec-Dara OS and DPd/DVd OS. Profile-likelihood 95% CIs shown here; these replace the Wald CIs reported in the abstract and typically provide more accurate coverage. From best-fit model. Presented by NWCJ van de Donk at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland 11

It’s quite remarkable the numbers we are looking at in relapsed MM! These modeled data from the landmark MajesTEC-3 trial showing projected relative survival of >85% with Tec-Dara. While very provocative, followup is still short for longterm projections. Fingers crossed 🤞 https://t.co/zPPu1ED85X

738 impressions · View post on X →

EXCALIBER-RRMM

10 slides Full trial profile →

Irene Solia@eirsolia

The results from the EXCALIBER study presented at Glasgow #IMS2026, with important Greek contribution of the Professors Maria Gavriatopoulou @mgavriatopoulou and Thanos Dimopoulos @thanosdimop #MultipleMyeloma @UoATherapeutics https://t.co/FpdDLiEYwS

58 impressions · View post on X →

#IMS26 #mmsm Plenary EXCALIBER-RRMM with also publication ➡️There is an early haematologic second-cancer signal. In the IberDd arm there were about 4 haematologic second primary malignancies, including 2 AML and 2 MDS, against 1 MDS on DVd, at only 15.7 months of follow-up. https://t.co/OEHPYhufXU

592 impressions · View post on X →

#IMS26 #mmsm Plenary EXCALIBER-RRMM with also publication ➡️Grade 3/4 neutropenia: 84% vs 11% (quite higher and concerning) 🛑82% of IberDd patients received G-CSF 🛑Iberdomide dose reductions: 34%. 🛑52% dose interruptions for neutropenia. ➡️Febrile neutropenia: 5.4% vs 0.5% https://t.co/cNXqW4MC9A

348 impressions · View post on X →

#IMS26 #mmsm Plenary EXCALIBER-RRMM with also publication MRD -ve CR was better with IberDd (41% vs 21%) and CR or better: 46% vs 24% PFS and OS are still pending. The FDA granted accelerated approval on August 13, 2026, based on the MRD result 🛑MRD was measured at 10⁻⁵ by https://t.co/qOypefbtnN

443 impressions · View post on X →

#IMS26 #mmsm Plenary EXCALIBER-RRMM with also publication 🧵 Important initial observations Study schema - note Len refractory was 1 out of 3 in IberDd ( 2 out of 3 were not refractory to Len) Dara-VD (control arm) was per CASTOR trial (i.e: the arms are asymmetric) https://t.co/HkcW5Sw82l

1.0K impressions · View post on X →

Iberdomide just raised the bar at first relapse! MRD-negative CR: 41.1% vs 20.7% with IberDd vs DVd. Twice the MRD-negative CR… that’s quite an EXCALIBER! #IMS2026 @TheIACH https://t.co/s0lhlP454h

1.4K impressions · View post on X →

Malin Hultcrantz MD PhD@MalinHultcrantz

IberDd vs DVD in EXCALIBER-RRMM CR 46% vs 25% MRD neg 41% vs 21 % Initial neutropenia can be overcome with G-CSF #IMS2026 #mmsm https://t.co/jCVNNHouUQ https://t.co/9M4KLxNoQQ

457 impressions · View post on X →

EXCALIBER-RRMM (Iberdomide-Dd vs DVd) by @SagarLonialMD 🏆#IMS26: EXCALIBER-RRMM: IberDd doubles MRD-neg CR vs DVd in 420 pts (40% vs 20%, P<0.0001). 💡Non-Heme AE: Diarrhea 30%, fatigue 25%, rash 10%, mostly G1, seemingly better than Len based combinations 💡Gr3+ neutropenia https://t.co/vjD9YDbW5G

631 impressions · View post on X →

Thanos Dimopoulos@thanosdimop

Great presentation of EXCALIBER RRMM by Sagar Lonial https://t.co/Miwqtbx1sd

791 impressions · View post on X →

3/ #IMS26 EXCALIBER-RRMM @SagarLonialMD et al And now paper out at @TheLancetOncol! https://t.co/DguduxLx82 https://t.co/EzbUGu7gXN

832 impressions · View post on X →

PERSEUS

10 slides Full trial profile →

And @LucaBertamini et al (great #IMS26 talk!) looked at 451 cases from PERSEUS with baseline CTC data available. Higher burden CTC cases often harbor HR features. Not surprisingly these high-CTCs cases in PERSEUS did worst #mmsm https://t.co/hbhSUmV9fF https://t.co/vSehmNhuQ2

643 impressions · View post on X →

Tracy King@MMKingT

Thats a wrap #IMS26 PERSEUS up front SOC- BsAB come forward-fixed duration therapies-looking forward to cure-InVivoCART ahead. https://t.co/ecfWfiFuHU

805 impressions · View post on X →

Vincent Rajkumar@VincentRK

PERSEUS is the gold standard benchmark outcome for Newly Diagnosed Myeloma 6 year overall survival: 86% 6 year PFS 81% with quad induction and Dara-Len maintenance. As we test bispecifics, ADCs, CARTs etc, any new approach should be better. A new therapy CANNOT have even 5% https://t.co/Z29oBm0ylR

13.4K impressions · View post on X →

1/ Impressive long-term PERSEUS update in transplant-eligible NDMM: DVRd induction → ASCT → DVRd consolidation → DR maintenance (n=355) vs VRd-R (n=354). Median follow-up: 81.3 months. Key findings 🧵 #mmsm The PFS benefit is striking and durable. Six-year PFS was 81.1% with https://t.co/EWYB7aZC4H

2.0K impressions · View post on X →

PERSEUS long-term follow-up at #IMS26: D-VRd → DR vs VRd → R in transplant-eligible NDMM (median follow-up >80 mo) 💡72-mo PFS: 81% vs 56% 💡Median PFS: not reached vs 80 mo 💡The benefit held across risk groups: 🟢 Standard risk: 88% vs 63% (HR 0.27) 🔴 High risk: 55.0% vs 33% https://t.co/ZWLSmNSKlI

6 impressions · View post on X →

#IMS26 #mmsm Plenary Long term follow up PERSEUS ➡️Median follow up ~7 years Dara-RVD showed better PFS of 81% vs. 56% with better MRD negativity at both 10-5 and 10-6 sensitivity thresholds (lower numbers with high risk disease) ➡️~ 3 out of 4 DVRd-DR patients receiving https://t.co/iQOFSCDNYB

2.6K impressions · View post on X →

#IMS26 #pietersonneveld presenting 6-yr (!) follow-up for PERSEUS. In standard-risk myeloma, 6-year PFS 88% 🤩 For HR cytogenetics, adding dara basically converts into standard-risk prognosis. Great, but we need to do better: BsAbs or CAR-T will be the way to close this gap. https://t.co/v2p7p3z1L8

6.1K impressions · View post on X →

Henry C Fung| MM, lymphoma, leukemia & CART@HenrychihangFu1

🚨 A model cannot fast-forward 15 years of follow-up. PERSEUS: projected median PFS 17.1 years. MajesTEC-3: projected median OS 18.5 years. These are extrapolations from approximately 4 and 3 years of median follow-up. Accuracy at the projected horizon remains unestablished. https://t.co/LWeCdf9hyo https://t.co/PPuqMJomFR

MajesTEC-3PERSEUS

2.4K impressions · View post on X →

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION Pieter Sonneveld, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, presented results from the long-term PFS analysis of the randomized phase III PERSEUS trial evaluating DVRd induction/consolidation + DR maintenance (DVRd-DR; n = 355) vs VRd-R (n = 354) in patients https://t.co/SG0GPePu07

147 impressions · View post on X →

NCT04751877 trial: Updated data from IMS 2026 (@Myeloma_Society) in 1L MM: anti-CD38 mAbs landscape, adapted from Dr. Akhil Santhosh (@tuttsakhil) 👉 https://t.co/V8wOYggpnM Updated landscape 👉 https://t.co/fUETXB1mH1 Learn more about NCT04751877: https://t.co/YYmevH13Fd #LARVOL #IMS2026 #InternationalMyelomaSociety #Myeloma #MMSM #HematologicOncology #Hematology #BloodCancers #CancerResearch #CancerData #Oncology #OncologyInsights #ClinicalTrials | @mtmdphd | @szusmani | @RahulBanerjeeMD | | @End_myeloma | @VincentRK

CEPHEUSIMROZPERSEUS

277 impressions · View post on X →

Updated NCT04751877 Data in 1L MM: anti-CD38 mAbs - IMS 2026 Trials: Perseus (EMN) | IMROZ (sanofi) | NCT04751877 (CHU Poitiers) | CEPHEUS (Janssen, Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson) Treatment Regimen: Perseus: Daratumumab + Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone vs Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone IMROZ: Isatuximab + Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone vs Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone NCT04751877: Isatuximab + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone +/- Bortezomib vs Isatuximab + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone CEPHEUS: Isatuximab + Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone vs Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone Median Follow-Up: Perseus: 47.5 months | IMROZ: 59.7 months | NCT04751877: 48.9 months | CEPHEUS: 76.0 months PFS: Perseus: 48 mo: 84.3% vs 67.7% IMROZ: 60 mo: 63.2% vs 45.2% NCT04751877: 18 mo: 87.2% vs 85.5%; 24 mo: 85.2% vs 80%; 36 mo: 78% vs 72.3%; 48 mo: 74% vs 65.7% CEPHEUS: 54 mo: 68.1% vs 49.5%; 72 mo: 59.3% vs 38.3% ORR%: Perseus: 96.6% vs 93.8% | IMROZ: 91.3% vs 92.3% | NCT04751877: 85% vs 78% | CEPHEUS: 97% vs 93% MRD negativity rate: Perseus: 75.2% vs 47.5% | IMROZ: 58.1% vs 43.6% | NCT04751877: 12 mo: 51% vs 21% | CEPHEUS: 61.1% vs 40% ≥CR rate: Perseus: 87.9% vs 70.1% | IMROZ: 74.7% vs 64.1% | NCT04751877: 58% vs 31% | CEPHEUS: 80.6% vs 61.4% Adapted from Dr. Akhil Santhosh (X 2025) LARVOL

TRIlogy-1

10 slides

Phenomenal results with TRIlogy-1 presented at #IMS26 by @MileHighMyeloma 93% MRD neg at 10(-6), CR rates of 79%, VGPR rates ≥ 90% and 2-year PFS rates of 81.3%!! Favorable dosing schedule, skin/nail toxicities seem much more manageable than the GPRC5D and minimal treatment https://t.co/S9btK3kenP

1.1K impressions · View post on X →

[Slide 1 - TRIlogy-1 Update: Durable PFS in the Expanded RP2D Cohort, presented by JV Matous] Expanded RP2D cohort - BCMA/GPRC5D naive (n=47), median follow-up 21.8 months. KM curve of PFS: 18-month PFS (95% CI) 85.5 (70.0-93.4); 24-month PFS (95% CI) 81.3 (63.3-91.0). Patients at risk: 47/44/37/23/16/6/0 at months 0/6/12/18/24/30/36. "Majority of patients progression free and alive at 2 years." Clinical cut-off: July 15, 2026. [Slide 2 - TRIlogy-1 Update: High Rate of Deep Responses and MRD Negativity] Expanded RP2D - BCMA/GPRC5D naive (n=47): ORR 93.6% (44/47) - sCR 63.8%, CR 14.9%, VGPR 12.8%, PR 2.1% (>=CR 78.7%, >=VGPR 91.5%). 19/20 (95%) evaluable BCMA/GPRC5D-naive patients MRD negative at 10^-5; 14/15 (93.3%) at 10^-6. Time to first response median 1.1 months (0.3-5.2); time to best response median 6.9 months (0.3-22.9). "Nearly 80% >=CR rate and >90% of evaluable patients MRD negative (10^-6)." Clinical cut-off July 15 2026, median follow-up 21.8 months.

Breno Moreno de Gusmão@morenodegusmao

#OA-70 Ramantamig (BCMA×GPRC5D×CD3 trispecific) at RP2D: 2-yr PFS >80% in TCE-naïve RRMM, ~79% ≥CR, >90% MRD-neg. New outpatient cohort showed safe, feasible SUD + first-dose outpatient administration with prophylactic tocilizumab — no ICANS, low-grade CRS. #mmsm #IMS2026 https://t.co/oHGAboWXQ1

31 impressions · View post on X →

[Footer from prior slide, partially visible at top: ...reached; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; Q8W, every 8 weeks; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose; sCR, stringent complete response; SD, stable disease; VGPR, very good partial response; Q8W, every 8 weeks. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK (slide 11)] TRIlogy-1 Update: Durable PFS in the Expanded RP2D Cohort Expanded RP2D cohort - BCMA/GPRC5D naive (n=47) Median follow-up: 21.8 months PFS curve (Patients progression free and alive %, 0-36 months): 18-month PFS (95% CI): 85.5 (70.0-93.4) 24-month PFS (95% CI): 81.3 (63.3-91.0) Patients at risk: 47 44 37 23 16 6 0 (at 0,6,12,18,24,30,36 months) Majority of patients progression free and alive at 2 years

When it comes to BsAbs (and now trispecific) T-cell engagers in myeloma, less is often more once response is obtained! Excellent to see ramantimig holding the #IMS26 line with Q8W dosing, i.e. only ~6x 💉 per year. Probably lower IVIG needs at this dose frequency as well! https://t.co/hgyuifFewt https://t.co/N2gIqocSyb

451 impressions · View post on X →

TRIlogy-1 Update: Durable PFS in the Expanded RP2D Cohort Kaplan-Meier curve: Expanded RP2D cohort - BCMA/GPRC5D naive (n=47), Median follow-up: 21.8 months Y-axis: Patients progression free and alive, %, 0-100 X-axis: PFS, months, 0-36 18-month PFS (95% CI): 85.5 (70.0-93.4) 24-month PFS (95% CI): 81.3 (63.3-91.0) Patients at risk (by month 0,6,12,18,24,30,36): 47, 44, 37, 23, 16, 6, 0 Banner: Majority of patients progression free and alive at 2 years

#IMS26 #mmsm Oral - TRIlogy-1 safety and efficacy with focus on SUD outpatient Outcomes Outcomes are really good with 2-yr PFS>80% 3 patients didn't respond but ORR is 94% Less frequent dosing Q 8 weeks still associated with deep prolonged responses https://t.co/PIQJA3W3PU

1.9K impressions · View post on X →

TRIlogy-1 Update: High Rate of Deep Responses and MRD Negativity Expanded RP2D - BCMA/GPRC5D naive Bar chart, y-axis ORR % 0-100. Single bar (n=47): total 93.6% (44/47), sCR 63.8%, CR 14.9%, VGPR 12.8%, PR 2.1%. Bracketed sub-totals: >=CR 78.7%, >=VGPR 91.5%. 19/20 (95%) evaluable BCMA/GPRC5D-naive patients MRD negative at 10^-5 - 14/15 (93.3%) at 10^-6 Table - BCMA/GPRC5D naive (n=44): Time to first response, months, median (range): 1.1 (0.3-5.2) Time to best response, months, median (range): 6.9 (0.3-22.9) Nearly 80% >=CR rate and >90% of evaluable patients MRD negative (10^-6) Footnotes: Clinical cut-off: July 15, 2026. Median follow-up: 21.8 months. Response was assessed by the investigator using IMWG 2016 criteria. BCMA, B-cell maturation antigen; CR, complete response; GPRC5D, G protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member D; MRD, minimal residual disease; ORR, overall response rate; PR, partial response; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose; sCR, stringent complete response; VGPR, very good partial response. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK 10 TRIlogy-1 Update: Durable, Deepening Responses Over Time Even With Switch to Q8W dosing Swimmer plot, Expanded RP2D BCMA/GPRC5D naive, x-axis Months 0-36. Each horizontal bar = one patient, colored by response depth over time (sCR dark red, CR red, VGPR light blue, PR grey/tan, MR blue, SD green, PD purple). Symbols: arrow = On Treatment as of July 15, 2026; diamond colors = D/C-PD (orange), D/C-AE (dark red), D/C-Patient withdrawal (navy), Death (red), D/C-Physician decision (grey); yellow circle = Switch to Q8W dosing; star = MRD negative (10^-5). Median DOR: NR (not reached) 61.4% of responders switched to Q8W dosing, with responses sustained or deepening post switch Footnotes: Clinical cut-off: July 15, 2026. Median follow-up: 21.8 months. Response was assessed by the investigator using IMWG 2016 criteria. AE, adverse event; BCMA, B-cell maturation antigen; CR, complete response; D/C, discontinued; GPRC5D, G protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member D; MR, minimal response; MRD, minimal residual disease; NR, not reached; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; Q8W, every 8 weeks; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose; sCR, stringent complete response; SD, stable disease; VGPR, very good partial response. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK 11 TRIlogy-1 Update: >80% 2-year PFS in the Initial RP2D Cohort (median 26.5 months follow-up) Initial RP2D cohort - BCMA/GPRC5D naive (n=27) Median follow up: 26.5 months Kaplan-Meier PFS curve, x-axis PFS months 0-36, y-axis Patients progression free and alive % 0-100. 18-month PFS (95% CI): 88.9 (69.4-96.3) 24-month PFS (95% CI): 84.4 (63.5-93.9) Patients at risk: 27, 27, 25, 23, 16, 6, 0 (at months 0,6,12,18,24,30,36) Majority of patients progression free and alive at 2 years Footnotes: Clinical cut-off: July 15, 2026. BCMA, B-cell maturation antigen; GPRC5D, G protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member D; PFS, progression-free survival; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose. 1. Krishnan A, et al. Blood 2025;146(Supplement 1):4042. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK 13

#IMS26 #mmsm Oral - TRIlogy-1 safety and efficacy with focus on SUD outpatient Safety G3 or higher infections plateau later on There is still taste changes reported as well as skin AE though seems numerically lower than Talq https://t.co/CGTRf1QSAY

132 impressions · View post on X →

TRIlogy-1 Update: Severe infections plateaued by 12 months Table - Patients, n (%) | Expanded RP2D (n=56) Any Grade | Grade 3/4 Infections: 48 (85.7) | 14 (25.0) Upper respiratory tract infection: 26 (46.4) | 1 (1.8) Pneumonia: 11 (19.6) | 6 (10.7) Urinary tract infection: 7 (12.5) | 1 (1.8) Nasopharyngitis: 6 (10.7) | 0 Covid-19: 6 (10.7) | 0 Hypogammaglobulinemia: 30 (53.6) Received ≥1 dose IgRT: 51 (91.1) If serum IgG <400 mg/dL, IgRT used to maintain levels regardless of active or history of infection Grade ≥3 infections most common in first 6 months and plateaued after 1 year (cumulative incidence curve, 0-35 months, Expanded RP2D): Patients at risk: 56 48 42 40 36 35 34 27 19 17 17 14 11 9 6 4 2 1 0 0 0 (across 0-35 months) Cumulative events: 0 6 9 10 12 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 Incidence of grade ≥3 infections was 25% with proactive infection management Clinical cut-off date: July 15, 2026. Median follow-up: 17.0 months. TEAEs graded by CTCAE v5.0. Shown are infections occurring in ≥10% (any grade) or 5% (grade 3/4). TEAEs listed by descending order of frequency in the total population. Patients with ≥1 TEAE of hypogammaglobulinemia or postbaseline IgG value <400 mg/dL. CTCAE, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events; IgG, immunoglobulin G; IgRT, immunoglobulin replacement therapy; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose; TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK (slide 8) TRIlogy-1 Update: Taste Changes, Skin AEs, Nail AEs, and Weight Loss Were Low Grade Table - AE, n (%) | Expanded RP2D (n=56) Taste changes: 37 (66.1); Grade 1/2, %: 42.9 / 23.2; Leading to discontinuation of treatment: 0; Leading to dose modification: 2 (3.6) Non-rash skin: 38 (67.9); Grade 1/2, %: 50.0 / 17.9; Leading to discontinuation of treatment: 1 (1.8); Leading to dose modification: 1 (1.8) Nail related: 36 (64.3); Grade 1/2, %: 62.5 / 1.8; Leading to discontinuation of treatment: 0; Leading to dose modification: 0 Rash related: 15 (26.8); Grade 1/2, %: 16.1 / 8.9; Grade ≥3: 1 (1.8); Leading to discontinuation of treatment: 1 (1.8); Leading to dose modification: 0 Mean weight loss from baseline was <5%, independent of taste changes (line chart, Mean change in weight from baseline % (SE) by Dose SUD-21) Number of patients - Patients with taste changes: 0 37 31 34 34 34 34 31 29 30 27 26 22 18 16 18 16 15 15 14 11 12 11 (by dose SUD through 21); Patients with no taste changes: 19 16 18 16 13 13 13 11 11 9 9 10 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 Majority of taste changes, skin, and nail AEs were grade 1, with only 1 patient discontinuing treatment; mean weight loss from baseline was <5% Clinical cut-off: July 15, 2026. Median follow-up: 17.0 (0.4-34.1) months. Taste changes included dysgeusia, ageusia, hypogeusia, and taste disorder. Per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, the maximum severity for taste changes is grade 2. Includes dose delays, skips, and reductions. Non-rash skin adverse events included skin exfoliation, dry skin, palmar plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, and pruritus. There were no grade ≥3 events. These events occurred in the same patient. Nail-related adverse events included nail discoloration, nail disorder, onycholysis, onychomadesis, onychoclasis, and nail ridging. Rash adverse events included rash, maculopapular rash, erythematous rash, and erythema. AE, adverse event; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose; SE, standard error. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK (slide 9) TRIlogy-1 Update: Outpatient Dosing of Ram Was Feasible with No New Safety Concerns Flow diagram: 30 patients designated to receive SUD and first treatment dose outpatient -> 93.3% (n=28) completed SUD outpatient -> 6.7% (n=2) received SUD inpatient: 1 disease burden, 1 patient concern -> 4 required HCRU for AEs ≤2 days post SUD: 1 Out of home medical care, 3 Hospitalization -> 1 CRS (gr 1), febrile neutropenia (gr 3) -> 1 noncardiac chest pain (gr 3) -> 1 tumor pain (gr 3) -> 79.3% (n=23) completed first treatment dose outpatient -> 20.7% (n=6) received first treatment dose inpatient: 2 disease burden, 1 severe weather, 3 AEs -> 2 required HCRU for AEs ≤2 days post first treatment dose: 1 Out of home medical care, 1 Hospitalization 96.6% received prophylactic tocilizumab before SUD CRS mainly gr 1 - SUD: 10.0% (all gr 1) - Treatment dose 1: 6.7% (all gr 1) With prophylactic tocilizumab, CRS at SUD and first treatment dose was infrequent and all grade 1 Patients with events leading to hospitalization at SUD denoted with purple boxes did not receive the first treatment dose outpatient due to the same or related events. One patient died due to refractory disease after SUD and did not receive the first treatment dose; the percentage receiving the first treatment dose is calculated using n=29 as the denominator. Due to grade 1 CRS. Due to grade 1 CRS, grade 2 diarrhea, and grade 1 headache. Due to grade 2 bone pain. Patient received the first treatment dose inpatient due to grade 3 neutropenia. One grade 3 event occurred at dose 2 in a nonresponder with PD. AE, adverse event; CRS, cytokine release syndrome; HCRU, healthcare resource utilization; PD, progressive disease; Ram, ramantamig; SUD, step-up dose. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK (slide 14)

#IMS26 #mmsm Oral - TRIlogy-1 safety and efficacy with focus on SUD outpatient Patient characteristics and study schema Nice dosing schema with Q4 then Q 8 weeks dosing schema https://t.co/L9E3TADb5C

2.2K impressions · View post on X →

TRIlogy-1 Update: Study Design and Outpatient Considerations Key eligibility criteria: - Triple-class exposed RRMM - ≥18 years of age - ECOG PS of 0 or 1 - Prior BCMA- or GPRC5D-targeted therapy permitted with sponsor approval Treatment at the Ram RP2D: 5 mg SC SUD -> 100 mg SC Q4W treatment dose -> Option to switch to 100 mg SC Q8W(a) - Prophylactic tocilizumab permitted(b) - Infection prophylaxis recommended(c) Outpatient dosing at the start of treatment was evaluated in dedicated RP2D cohorts Endpoints: Primary: Safety Secondary: ORR(d) Exploratory: PFS,(d) MRD negativity Outpatient dosing outcomes: Outpatient completion of SUD and dose 1, CRS, HCRU within 2 days of outpatient Outpatient administration at start of treatment (SUD and first treatment dose): Protocol-defined patient selection and eligibility: - Patients eligible for outpatient dosing regardless of tumor burden - No rapidly progressing disease or deterioration in neurologic status - Outpatient dosing at the start of treatment was not offered to all RP2D cohorts Protocol-defined monitoring and management: - Assessments for CRS, ICANS, and other clinically significant events - Stringent criteria for hospitalization for CRS Footnotes: aPatients can switch to Q8W with sponsor approval. bTocilizumab could be used prophylactically or considered for fever after other causes are excluded; early use could be considered in patients at high risk of severe CRS. cInfection prophylaxes were administered per institutional guidelines. dResponse and disease progression were assessed by International Myeloma Working Group 2016 criteria. BCMA, B-cell maturation antigen; CRS, cytokine release syndrome; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; GPRC5D, G protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member D; HCRU, healthcare resource utilization; ICANS, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome; MRD, measurable residual disease; ORR, overall response rate; PFS, progression-free survival; Q8W, every 8 weeks; Ram, ramantamig; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose; RRMM, relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma; SC, subcutaneous; SUD, step-up dose. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK 4 TRIlogy-1 Update: Expanded RP2D Cohort Disposition 56 patients received Ram at the RP2D (Expanded RP2D) -> 30 patients at RP2D designated to receive SUD and 1st treatment dose in outpatient setting 14 (25.0%) patients discontinued treatment: - 9 (16.1%) progressive disease - 1 (1.8%) physician decision(a) - 1 (1.8%) adverse event - 3 (5.4%) death (all deemed unrelated to Ram by the investigator)(b) 42 (75.0%) patients remained on treatment Median (range) follow-up: 17.0 (0.4-34.1) months 20 additional patients (all BCMA/GPRC5D-naive) at the RP2D vs prior reports(1) Clinical cut-off date: July 15, 2026. aPatient had grade 3 myelomatous meningitis, which did not meet IMWG 2016 criteria for disease progression and discontinued treatment due to physician decision. bCauses of death leading to treatment discontinuation included AEs of pneumonia in 2 patients (these deaths occurred 89 and 55 days after the last dose of Ram, were not considered treatment-emergent, and adjudicated as unrelated to Ram by the investigator) and other (refractory disease; this patient had prior BCMA-direct therapy exposure and received teclistamab as the immediate prior line of therapy). AE, adverse event; BCMA, B-cell maturation antigen; GPRC5D, G protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member D; IMWG, International Myeloma Working Group; Ram, ramantamig; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose; SUD, step-up dose. 1. Krishnan A, et al. Blood 2025;146(Supplement 1):4042. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK 5 TRIlogy-1 Update: Baseline Characteristics Consistent With Triple-Class Exposed RRMM Table 1 (left): Characteristic | RP2D Expanded (n=56) | RP2D Outpatient (n=30) Age, years, median (range): 68 (43-87) | 69 (47-87) Male, n (%): 34 (60.7) | 21 (70.0) Race, n (%): White: 40 (71.4) | 21 (70.0) Black/African American: 2 (3.6) | 2 (6.7) Asian: 1 (1.8) | 0 Multiple: 2 (3.6) | 0 Unknown/not reported: 11 (19.6) | 8 (26.7) Extramedullary plasmacytomas ≥1,(a) n (%): 4 (7.1) | 2 (6.7) High-risk cytogenetics,(b) n (%): 18 (41.9) | 12 (57.1) ISS stage,(c) n (%): I: 27 (48.2) | 15 (50.0) II: 22 (39.3) | 11 (36.7) III: 7 (12.5) | 4 (13.3) Years since diagnosis, median (range)(d): 7.0 (0.1-18.7) | 7.0 (0.1-11.3) Median prior LOT, n (range): 3 (1-11) | 3 (1-11) Table 2 (right): Characteristic | RP2D Expanded (n=56) | RP2D Outpatient (n=30) Exposure status, n (%): Triple-class(e): 56 (100.0) | 30 (100.0) Penta-drug(f): 22 (39.3) | 12 (40.0) BCMA/GPRC5D exposed: 9 (16.1) | 4 (13.3) Prior BCMA: 8 (14.3) | 4 (13.3) Prior GPRC5D: 1 (1.8) | 0 Antibody-drug conjugate: 2 (3.6) | 1 (3.3) CAR-T therapy: 4 (7.1) | 3 (10.0) Bispecific antibody: 6 (10.7) | 2 (6.7) Refractory status, n (%): PI: 30 (53.6) | 16 (53.3) IMiD: 52 (92.9) | 26 (86.7) Anti-CD38 mAb: 54 (96.4) | 27 (90.0) Triple-class(e): 29 (51.8) | 15 (50.0) Penta-drug(f): 3 (5.4) | 1 (3.3) To last LOT: 51 (91.1) | 25 (83.3) Patient characteristics generally similar among all patients and those in the outpatient dosing cohort Clinical cut-off date: July 15, 2026. aGe1 nonradiated, bone-independent lesion ≥2 cm. bCytogenetic risk is based on FISH or karyotype testing. Defined as del(17p), t(4;14), or t(14;16). Percentages are based on patients with available data (n=46 in the expanded RP2D cohort and n=21 in the outpatient cohort). cISS staging is derived based on serum β2-microglobulin and albumin. dBased on n=55 patients at the RP2D and n=29 patients in the outpatient dosing cohort. ePI, IMiD, and anti-CD38 mAb. f≥2 PIs, ≥2 IMiDs, and anti-CD38 mAb. BCMA, B-cell maturation antigen; CAR, chimeric antigen receptor; FISH, fluorescence in situ hybridization; GPRC5D, G protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member D; IMiD, immunomodulatory drug; ISS, International Staging System; LOT, line of therapy; mAb, monoclonal antibody; PI, proteasome inhibitor; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK 6

TRIlogy trial presented at #IMS26 by @MileHighMyeloma . Continued impressive results for ramantamig with good safety profile with low rate of CRS and severe infections, 2 year PFS > 80%, high MRD negativity rate. Outpatient dosing implemented. Few subjects previously exposed to https://t.co/Qe1T0Zqbha

1.6K impressions · View post on X →

TRIlogy-1 Update: Safety Consistent with Prior Reports [ref 1] Table - Common TEAEs, >=30% (any Grade) or 10% (Grade 3/4), n (%) | Expanded RP2D (n=56): Any Grade | Grade 3/4 Hematologic TEAEs Neutropenia | 27 (48.2) | 23 (41.8) Lymphopenia | 21 (37.5) | 20 (35.7) Nonhematologic TEAEs Infections | 48 (85.7) | 14 (25.0) Non-rash skin[b] | 38 (67.9) | 0 Taste changes[c] | 37 (66.1) | -- Nail related[d] | 36 (64.3) | 0 CRS | 22 (39.3) | 1 (1.8) Fatigue | 22 (39.3) | 4 (7.1) Cough | 21 (37.5) | 0 Diarrhea | 21 (37.5) | 2 (3.6) Injection site erythema | 19 (33.9) | 0 Hypertension | 10 (17.9) | 7 (12.5) Right-side bullets: - 1 DLT (grade 4 neutropenia) - CRS mostly low grade (grade 1, 30.4%; grade 2, 7.1%) - All at SUD or treatment dose 1, except for 1 grade 3 event at dose 2 in a nonresponder with PD - 52% received prophylactic tocilizumab at SUD - No ICANS - 1 treatment discontinuation due to AEs[e] - No treatment-related deaths Black banner: CRS remains predominantly low grade and confined to SUD and first treatment dose Footnote: Clinical cut-off date: July 15, 2026. Median follow-up: 17.0 (0.4-34.1) months. aTEAEs graded by CTCAE v5.0; CRS per ASTCT criteria. bSkin exfoliation, dry skin, pruritus, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome. cTaste changes included dysgeusia, ageusia, hypogeusia, and taste disorder. Per the CTCAE, the maximum severity for taste changes is grade 2. dNail-related adverse events included nail discoloration, nail disorder, onycholysis, onychomadesis, onychoclasis, and nail ridging. ePruritus and maculopapular rash. AE, adverse event; ASTCT, American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy; CRS, cytokine release syndrome; CTCAE, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events; DLT, dose limiting toxicity; ICANS, immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome; PD, progressive disease; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose; SUD, step-up dose; TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event. 1. Krishnan A, et al. Blood 2025;146(Supplement 1):4042. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK. [Slide 7] TRIlogy-1 Update: Taste Changes, Skin AEs, Nail AEs, and Weight Loss Were Low Grade Table - AE, n (%) | Expanded RP2D (n=56) Taste changes[a] | 37 (66.1) Grade 1/2, % | 42.9 / 23.2 Leading to discontinuation of treatment | 0 Leading to dose modification[b] | 2 (3.6) Non-rash skin[c] | 38 (67.9) Grade 1/2,[d] % | 50.0 / 17.9 Leading to discontinuation of treatment | 1 (1.8)[e] Leading to dose modification[b] | 1 (1.8) Nail related[f] | 36 (64.3) Grade 1/2,[d] % | 62.5 / 1.8 Leading to discontinuation of treatment | 0 Leading to dose modification[b] | 0 Rash related[g] | 15 (26.8) Grade 1/2, % | 16.1 / 8.9 Grade >=3 | 1 (1.8) Leading to discontinuation of treatment | 1 (1.8)[e] Leading to dose modification[b] | 0 Right chart: "Mean weight loss from baseline was <5%, independent of taste changes" - line chart, y-axis "Mean change in weight from baseline, % (SE)" from -8 to 8, x-axis "Dose" (SUD, 1-21). Two series: Patients with taste changes (red circles) and Patients with no taste changes (black triangles), both hovering near 0 declining slightly to about -3 to -5% by dose 20-21, with error bars. Number of patients at each dose point (partial, from table under chart): Patients with taste changes: 0, 37, 31, 34, 34, 31, 30, 33, 30, 27, 22, 18, 15, 14, 12, 11, 11 Patients with no taste changes: 19, 16, 18, 16, 13, 16, 13, 11, 7, 9, 10, 7, 7, 7, 6, 5, 6, 6, 5 Black banner: Majority of taste changes, skin, and nail AEs were grade 1, with only 1 patient discontinuing treatment; mean weight loss from baseline was <5% Footnote: Clincal cut-off: July 15, 2026. Median follow-up: 17.0 (0.4-34.1) months. aTaste changes included dysgeusia, ageusia, hypogeusia, and taste disorder. Per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, the maximum severity for taste changes is grade 2. bIncludes dose delays, skips, and reductions. cNon-rash skin adverse events included skin exfoliation, dry skin, palmar plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, and pruritus. dThere were no grade >=3 events. eThese events occurred in the same patient. fNail-related adverse events included nail discoloration, nail disorder, onycholysis, onychomadesis, onychoclasis, and nail ridging. gRash adverse events included rash, maculopapular rash, erythematous rash, and erythema. AE, adverse event; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose; SE, standard error. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK. [Slide 9] TRIlogy-1 Update: Durable, Deepening Responses[a] Over Time Even With Switch to Q8W dosing Swimmer-plot chart: y-axis "Expanded RP2D BCMA/GPRC5D naive" (individual patient rows), x-axis "Months" 0-36. Bars colored by response category per legend: sCR (dark red), CR (red), VGPR (blue), PR (light blue), MR (dark blue), SD (green), PD (dark purple). Arrow (->) = On Treatment as of July 15, 2026. Symbols: diamond D/C-PD, diamond D/C-AE, diamond D/C-Patient withdrawal, diamond Death, diamond D/C-Physician decision, yellow circle = Switch to Q8W dosing, star = MRD negative (10^-6). Label on right: "Median DOR: NR" Black banner: 61.4% of responders switched to Q8W dosing, with responses sustained or deepening post switch Footnote: Clinical cut-off: July 15, 2026. Median follow-up: 21.8 months. aResponse was assessed by the investigator using IMWG 2016 criteria. AE, adverse event; BCMA, B-cell maturation antigen; CR, complete response; D/C, discontinued; GPRC5D, G protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member D; MR, minimal response; MRD, minimal residual disease; NR, not reached; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; Q8W, every 8 weeks; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose; sCR, stringent complete response; SD, stable disease; VGPR, very good partial response. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK. [Slide 11] TRIlogy-1 Update: High Rate of Deep Responses[a] and MRD Negativity Bar chart: "Expanded RP2D - BCMA/GPRC5D naive", y-axis "ORR, %" 0-100. Single stacked bar "BCMA/GPRC5D naive (n=47)": PR 2.1, VGPR 12.8, CR 14.9, sCR 63.8. Bracket labels: >=CR 78.7, >=VGPR 91.5. Header value above bar: 93.6 (44/47). Right bullets: - 19/20 (95%) evaluable BCMA/GPRC5D-naive patients MRD negative at 10^-5 - 14/15 (93.3%) at 10^-6 Table: | BCMA/GPRC5D naive (n=44) Time to first response, months, median (range) | 1.1 (0.3-5.2) Time to best response, months, median (range) | 6.9 (0.3-22.9) Black banner: Nearly 80% >=CR rate and >90% of evaluable patients MRD negative (10^-6) Footnote: Clinical cut-off: July 15, 2026. Median follow-up: 21.8 months. aResponse was assessed by the investigator using IMWG 2016 criteria. BCMA, B-cell maturation antigen; CR, complete response; GPRC5D, G protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member D; MRD, minimal residual disease; ORR, overall response rate; PR, partial response; RP2D, recommended phase 2 dose; sCR, stringent complete response; VGPR, very good partial response. Presented by JV Matous at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, UK. [Slide 10]

Rafael Fonseca MD 🦔🇺🇸🏜🇲🇽@Rfonsi1

TRIlogy-1 study of trispecific antibody shows high levels of activity. Median prior LOT3 #IMS26 #mmsm https://t.co/obbViPdfvp

1.3K impressions · View post on X →

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION Jeffrey Matous presents updated findings from the phase I TRILogy-1 trial evaluating ramantamig at the RP2D (5 mg SC SUD followed by 100 mg SC Q4W, with an option to switch to Q8W) in patients with triple-class exposed RRMM, including a dedicated https://t.co/95RjnbKdD6

292 impressions · View post on X →

Jeffrey Matous, MD, shares updates on the TRIlogy-1 trial of ramantamig, a BCMA & GPRC5d trispecific antibody. Response was sustained in pts who switched to Q8W dosing; 2-year PFS was >80% in pts with BCMA/GPRC5d-naïve TCE RRMM. #IMS26 @MileHighMyeloma https://t.co/FtputHAIFA

342 impressions · View post on X →

CARTITUDE-2 Cohort A

8 slides

Minhua Chu@chuminhua432

CARVYKTI five-year data: half still progression-free after one infusion $LEGN presented five-year follow-up from CARTITUDE-2 Cohort A at #IMS2026. n=20 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma after 1–3 prior lines. - Median follow-up: 60.7 months. - One CARVYKTI https://t.co/Gb9tZunBw4

1.5K impressions · View post on X →

CARTITUDE-2 Cohort A, PA-288) 5-year data from CARTITUDE-2 Cohort A at #IMS26 🧵 poster session A single cilta-cel infusion in RRMM with 1–3 prior lines (PI-exposed, len-refractory 💡50% of patients alive and progression-free at 5+ years with no further therapy. 💡5-yr PFS https://t.co/1JC5YO8h0F

462 impressions · View post on X →

[Poster PA-288, IMS 23rd Annual Meeting - Long-Term (>=5-Year) Remission and Survival With Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma With 1-3 Prior Lines of Therapy: CARTITUDE-2 Cohort A. Adam D. Cohen et al.] CARTITUDE-2 (NCT04133636) Cohort A: patients with 1-3 prior LOT, exposed to a PI and lenalidomide-refractory. Median follow-up 60.7 months, all patients >=5 years from cilta-cel infusion. Target dose 0.75x10^6 CAR+ viable T cells/kg. Key takeaway: Long-term phase 2 data suggest earlier use of cilta-cel in patients with 1-3 prior LOT may be associated with higher likelihood of durable 5-year remissions vs later-line use (1 in 2 patients in earlier lines vs 1 in 3 in later lines). Results: With median follow-up 60.7 months (range 3.3-63.1), 10 of 20 patients (50%) remained alive and progression-free without further anti-myeloma treatment >=5 years after cilta-cel infusion. 18/20 patients (90%) received cilta-cel infusion (per correlative analysis note). Deaths due to AE <5yr n=2; withdrawal without PD <5yr n=1. Baseline characteristics by durable response group (>=5yr alive/PFS n=10 vs PD/death by yr5 n=7): trend toward lower baseline tumor burden in durable responders; 60% of durable responders had decrease in tumor burden from screening to infusion (vs 42.9% in PD/death group); 5/7(71.4%) durable responders had >=1 high-risk cytogenetic feature at baseline (4/7 had >=2) vs 3/7(42.9%)/3/7(42.9%) in PD/death group; 5/10(50%) durable responders were refractory to daratumumab; median time from start of last LOT to progression numerically higher in durable responders (12.8 vs 5.7 months). Efficacy: PFS median 60.5 months (95% CI 12.9-NE), 5-yr PFS rate 54.2% (CART-2 cohort A n=20) vs CARTITUDE-1 33.3% (5-yr PFS 33.7%). OS median NR (19-NE), 5-yr OS rate 69.2% (CART-2) vs CARTITUDE-1 51.3%. 95% (19/20) achieved CR/sCR as best response; one patient had minimal response, died due to COVID-19 pneumonia. Three patients alive/PFS at >=5yr assessed by bone marrow at 5yr, all MRD-negative (10^-6 threshold). Biomarker correlates of durable response: patients alive/PFS at >=5yr had significantly higher CD4+ naive T-cell levels at apheresis (P=0.036) and higher CAR+CD4+ central memory T cells at Tmax post-infusion (P=0.019) vs those who died/progressed <5yr. Safety update since last CARTITUDE-2 report (N=20), new since 30-month report: second primary malignancy (not related to cilta-cel) 5(25.0%) - AML 1, breast cancer 1, prostate cancer 1, basal cell carcinoma 1, melanoma in situ 1, squamous cell carcinoma 1. CAR T-related neurotoxicity: cranial nerve palsies 2, parkinsonism 2(10.0%). Overall mortality 7(35.0%). Death due to AE 1(5.0%). Conclusions: 10/20 patients (50%) in CARTITUDE-2 cohort A remained alive/PFS at >=5 years without further treatment. Median PFS 60.5 months, 5-year OS rate 69.2%. No new cases of neurotoxicity reported in long-term follow-up.

CARTITUDE-2 Cohort ACARTITUDE-4

#IMS26 Woohoo!! CARTITUDE-2 A: single-arm prelude to CARTITUDE-4, e.g. cilta-cel in 1-3 prior lines. 5-year PFS 54%, meaning CAR-T cured over half of myeloma pts (n=20) by IMWG/IMS criteria 👏👏 Of course CARTITUDE-4 with longer follow-up will be imperative to prove this. https://t.co/Q9LJ33jffW

2.2K impressions · View post on X →

Legend Biotech@LegendBiotech

A milestone moment at #IMS2026: Today, Adam D. Cohen, MD, presented 5-year CARTITUDE-2 Cohort A findings, contributing new insights into long-term RRMM patient outcomes following earlier-line treatment. Explore the key findings: https://t.co/ayK3mqyw5E #LegendBiotech https://t.co/bqZShAfnDC

186 impressions · View post on X →

Legend Biotech@LegendBiotech

5-year CARTITUDE-2 Cohort A data at #IMS2026 We presented long-term findings from CARTITUDE-2 Cohort A in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) treated as early as second line. Learn more: https://t.co/ayK3mqyw5E #LegendBiotech #MultipleMyeloma https://t.co/RL25viqrOi

207 impressions · View post on X →

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | POSTER Adam Cohen presents long-term follow-up data from CARTITUDE-2 Cohort A evaluating cilta-cel in patients with RRMM after 1–3 prior LOT (N = 20). At a median follow-up of 60.7 months, 50% of patients remained alive and progression-free without further https://t.co/RW60S3aDy4

149 impressions · View post on X →

Legend Biotech Medical Affairs@LegendUSMA

At #IMS2026, Dr. Adam Cohen @CohenAd_MMdoc will present long-term remission and survival outcomes from CARTITUDE-2 Cohort A evaluating BCMA-directed CAR-T therapy in multiple myeloma. Stay tuned for more. #MultipleMyeloma #CART #mmsm https://t.co/UcWdfcR1hD

124 impressions · View post on X →

Legend Biotech Medical Affairs@LegendUSMA

New data is coming to #IMS2026. Legend will share 5-year follow-up data from CARTITUDE-2 Cohort A. Explore the details at the link below. https://t.co/dRCCv0BHwt https://t.co/046YX2TdCh

66 impressions · View post on X →

CAMMA 1

7 slides

@ravivij presenting Arm A of CAMMA-1 evaluating a fixed-duration, cevostamab modified regimen QW/Q2W. Encouraging safety and response data with this regimen #IMS26 #mmsm https://t.co/Rj6jDIQMkZ

358 impressions · View post on X →

Safety summary n (%) unless stated | N=24 Median follow-up, months (range) | 47.5 (0.8-53.3) AE of any Gr | 24 (100) Gr 3-4 AE | 17 (70.8) Serious AE | 15 (66.7) Gr 5 AE excluding PD | 2 (8.3) - Sepsis* and cardiovascular event (not treatment related) AE leading to cevostamab discontinuation | 2 (8.3) - Pneumonia (treatment related) and HLH and AML (not treatment related) n (%) of patients with AEs of interest by Grade (bar chart, Gr1-5): Neutropenia: 54.2% Anemia: 33.4% Thrombocytopenia: 20.9% CRS: 75.0% Infections: 75.0% Rash: 29.1% With the exception of rash, no substantial skin conditions, hair and nail changes or mucosal toxicities were observed One Gr 1 AE of ICANS was reported The fixed-duration, modified regimen, with a QW/Q2W dosing intensity in C1-6, had a manageable overall safety profile Data cut-off: January 23, 2026. *Histopathological assessment suggested event occurred in the setting of PD. Group term neutropenia, neutrophil count decreased and febrile neutropenia. Group term thrombocytopenia and platelet count decreased. MedDRA System Organ Class Infections and Infestations. MedDRA high-level terms rashes, eruptions and exanthems NEC, exfoliative conditions, dermatitis ascribed to specific agent, acnes, dermatitis and eczema, and bullous conditions. HLH, hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. Response rates Response rates (%) bar chart - PR, VGPR, CR, sCR ORR: 70.8% (95% CI: 53.8, 94.0) sCR: 20.8% CR: 12.5% VGPR: 25.0% PR: 12.5% VGPR+: 58.3% N=24 MRD-negative CR+ rates at the 10^-6 level 8 patients achieved CR+ (33.3%) 4 were MRD evaluable All were MRD negative at the 10^-6 level The fixed-duration, modified regimen was highly active (ORR: 70.8%; VGPR+ rate: 58.3%). All MRD-evaluable CR+ patients were MRD negative at the 10^-6 level. Data cut-off: January 23, 2026. Evolution of response over time Evolution of response over time among responders (swimmer plot, up to 17 responders, duration of follow-up in months) Legend: Overall response = sCR, CR, VGPR, PR, MR, SD, PD, No response reported End of treatment or study status/reason: Death, Completed, AE, PD, Physician decision, Ongoing Responses deepened over time - Median time to first PR was 1.0 month, VGPR was 3.3 months and CR+ was 9.7 months 11 of 17 responders completed 13 cycles of treatment in PR+ - 7 in CR+ - 3 in VGPR, including 1 who subsequently achieved CR+ - 1 in PR 9 of 11 responders who completed 13 cycles in PR+ had responses >40 months, including all 7 CR+ patients The fixed-duration, modified regimen induced prolonged responses that continued after treatment completion. All 7 patients who completed 13 cycles in CR+ had responses >40 months. Data cut-off: January 23, 2026. Survival outcomes PFS (KM curve, All patients N=24): Patients remaining at risk: 24 21 15 15 13 13 12 12 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 5 3 1 NE (months 0-52) mPFS in the entire cohort, months (95% CI): 12.4 (2.8, NE) 36-month PFS rate, % (95% CI): 41.7 (21.9, 61.4) OS (KM curve, All patients N=24): Patients remaining at risk: 24 22 22 20 19 19 17 17 17 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 15 8 4 1 NE mOS in the entire cohort, months (95% CI): NR (17.3, NE) 36-month OS rate, % (95% CI): 66.7 (47.8, 85.5) Survival outcomes were promising, with a plateau observed in the probability of PFS and OS events in the absence of treatment Data cut-off: January 23, 2026.

#IMS26 #mmsm Oral - cevostamab pom dex ➡️ median F/ ~20 mo with PFS and DOR NR ➡️ Other mechanism of action to look for https://t.co/0PxCOhtvMo

544 impressions · View post on X →

Arm B randomized dose-expansion overview Patients: RRMM with ≥1 prior line including an IMiD and a PI; Pom-refractory patients excluded Objectives: Primary: Safety, RP2D; Secondary: Activity, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics Dosing regimens: Patients were randomized 1:1 to the 70 mg or 105 mg cevostamab target-dose level at enrolment Cevostamab was initiated with double step-up dosing (0.3/3.3 mg) in a 14-day pre-phase or triple step-up dosing (0.3/1.2/3.6 mg) in a 21-day pre-phase* Schema across C1, C2-4, C5-6, C7+: 70 mg IV cevostamab: D1, D15 dosing in C1, C2-4, C5-6; D1 only in C7+ 105 mg IV cevostamab: D1, D15 dosing in C1, C2-4, C5-6; D1 only in C7+ 2 mg oral Pom: D1-21 continuous across cycles 20 mg IV/oral dex: D1, D8, D15, D22 across cycles *Patients were hospitalized for ≥48 hours after each cevostamab infusion in the pre-phase. Treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. IV dex was given as premedication for all cevostamab doses in the pre-phase and C1. Optional from C5. Baseline characteristics by target-dose level n (%) unless stated | 70 mg (N=29) | 105 mg (N=25) Median age, years (range): 65 (40-76) | 65 (48-80) Male: 14 (48.3) | 14 (56.0) ECOG PS 0: 14 (48.3) | 14 (56.0); PS 1: 15 (51.7) | 11 (44.0) ISS stage I: 17 (60.7)* | 15 (62.5); II: 8 (28.6)* | 8 (33.3); III: 3 (10.7)* | 1 (4.2) HR cytogenetics, n (%) of patients with a conclusive assay result: 3/20 (15.0) | 8/22 (36.4) Extramedullary disease: 4 (13.8) | 3 (12.0) Median time from diagnosis, years (range): 6.6 (0.4-16.5) | 4.0 (1.1-26.0) n (%) unless stated | 70 mg (N=29) | 105 mg (N=25) Median number of prior lines of therapy, n (range): 2 (1-6) | 2 (1-6) Triple-class exposed: 21 (72.4) | 14 (56.0) Triple-class refractory: 9 (31.0) | 6 (24.0) Penta-drug refractory: 5 (17.9) | 3 (12.0) Refractory to last prior therapy: 21 (72.4) | 17 (68.0) The median number of prior lines of therapy was 2 Most patients were triple-class exposed and refractory to their last prior therapy Characteristics were comparable between groups, except for a higher rate of HR cytogenetics in the 105 mg cohort and triple-class exposure in the 70 mg cohort Data cut-off: June 12, 2026. Includes t(4;14), t(14;16) and del(17p). ≥1 IMiD, ≥1 PI and ≥1 anti-CD38 antibody. ≥2 IMiDs, ≥2 PIs and ≥1 anti-CD38 antibody. DOR and PFS by target-dose level DOR (KM curve, treatment group 70 mg N=29 vs 105 mg N=25, censored marks): Patients remaining at risk 70mg: 25 22 20 20 18 17 17 16 12 8 5 3 1 NE; 105mg: 22 20 20 17 16 15 12 9 7 3 1 NE 70 mg (n=25) | 105 mg (n=22) Median DOR, months (95% CI): NR (NE-NE) | NR (15.0-NE) 18-month DOR, % (95% CI): 74.0 (55.9-92.0) | 68.2 (48.7-87.6) PFS (KM curve, treatment group 70 mg N=29 vs 105 mg N=25): Patients remaining at risk 70mg: 29 28 25 23 21 19 18 17 13 9 6 3 1 NE; 105mg: 25 23 21 19 18 15 11 9 7 3 1 NE 70 mg (N=29) | 105 mg (N=25) Median PFS*, months (95% CI): NR (15.6-NE) | NR (16.9-NE) 18-month PFS, % (95% CI): 67.4 (49.8-84.9) | 66.0 (46.7-85.3) After a median follow-up of ~20 months, median PFS was not reached in both cohorts. 18-month DOR and PFS rates were generally comparable between dose groups. Data cut-off: June 12, 2026. *In entire cohort. Safety summary by target-dose level n (%) unless stated | 70 mg (N=29) | 105 mg (N=25) Median follow-up, months (range): 20.2 (12.7-27.5) | 20.4 (3.3-27.3) Any Gr AE: 29 (100) | 25 (100) Gr 3-4 AE: 24 (82.8) | 24 (96.0) Serious AE: 17 (58.6) | 15 (60.0) Gr 5 AE excluding PD: 1 (3.4)* | 1 (4.0) AE leading to discontinuation - Cevostamab: 2 (6.9) | 2 (8.0); Pom: 8 (27.6) | 8 (32.0); Dex: 0 | 2 (8.0) n (%) with AEs of interest by Grade (mirrored bar chart 70mg vs 105mg, Gr1-5): Neutropenia: 79.3% (70mg) | 84.0% (105mg) Anemia: 34.5% | 40.0% Thrombocytopenia: 24.1% | 32.0% CRS: 72.4% | 68.0% Infections: 75.9% | 80.0% Rash: 34.5% | 56.0% With the exception of rash, no substantial skin conditions, hair and nail changes or mucosal toxicities were observed Low ICANS incidence: Single cases of Gr 1 and Gr 2 only (n=1 each in 105 mg cohort) Overall rates of AEs were generally comparable between dose groups, with a lower incidence of Gr 3-4 events and rash in the 70 mg cohort Data cut-off: June 12, 2026. *Septic shock (treatment related). Intracranial haemorrhage (not treatment related) and weight increased (treatment related) (n=1 each). Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (not treatment related) and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (treatment related) (n=1 each). Infective exacerbation of chronic obstructive airways disease (not treatment related) (n=1).

CAMMA 1 (Cevostamab + Pom-Dex) 💊 #IMS26: Cevostamab + pom-dex in BCMA-naïve RRMM with 2 different dose levels 70 mg and 105 mg 💡ORR 86-88%, durable responses 💡Gr3-4 AEs in up to 96% (105mg) and Gr3-4 infections up to 40% 💡Is the higher dose's efficacy gain worth the added toxicity burden? #MultipleMyeloma #MMsm #FcRH5 #LessIsMore @Myeloma_Society

149 impressions · View post on X →

International Myeloma Society Arm B randomized dose-expansion overview Patients - RRMM with >=1 prior line including an IMiD and a PI - Pom-refractory patients excluded Objectives - Primary: Safety, RP2D - Secondary: Activity, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics Dosing regimens - Patients were randomized 1:1 to the 70 mg or 105 mg cevostamab target-dose level at enrolment - Cevostamab was initiated with double step-up dosing (0.3/3.3 mg) in a 14-day pre-phase or triple step-up dosing (0.3/1.2/3.6 mg) in a 21-day pre-phase* [Schema] R 1:1 -> 70 mg IV cevostamab / 105 mg IV cevostamab (D1, D15 across cycles C1, C2-4, C5-6, C7+); 2 mg oral Pom D1-21 each cycle; 20 mg IV/oral dex [dosing days small print, not fully legible] *Patients were hospitalized for >=48 hours after each cevostamab infusion in the pre-phase. [footnote small print partially illegible] Treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. IV dex was given as premedication for all cevostamab doses in the pre-phase and C1. Optional from C5. International Myeloma Society Response rates by target-dose level Response rates (%) by target-dose level — PR | VGPR | CR | sCR 70 mg (N=29): ORR: 86.2% (95% CI: 71.9-100); CR+: 62.1%; VGPR+: 75.9%; stacked bar: 44.8% (CR/sCR block) + 17.2% + 13.8% (VGPR) + 10.3% (PR) 105 mg (N=25): ORR: 88.0% (95% CI: 73.3-100); CR+: 64.0%; VGPR+: 76.0%; stacked bar: 44.0% + 20.0% + 12.0% (VGPR) + 12.0% (PR) Median time on study, months (range): 70 mg (N=29): 20.2 (12.7-27.5); 105 mg (N=25): 20.4 (3.3-27.3) Cevostamab plus pom-dex induced high ORR, VGPR+ and CR+ rates at both target doses Response rates were comparable between dose groups Data cut-off: June 12, 2026 [date partially legible] International Myeloma Society Safety summary by target-dose level [Left table] n (%) unless stated | 70 mg (N=29) | 105 mg (N=25) Median follow-up, months (range) | 20.2 (12.7-27.5) | 20.4 (3.3-27.3) Any Gr AE | 29 (100) | 25 (100) Gr 3-4 AE | 24 (82.8) | 24 (96.0) Serious AE | 17 (58.6) | 15 (60.0) Gr 5 AE excluding PD | 1 (3.4)* | 1 (4.0)† AE leading to discontinuation Cevostamab | 2 (6.9)‡ | 2 (8.0)§ Pom | 8 (27.6) | 8 (32.0) Dex | 0 | 2 (8.0) [Right chart] n (%) with AEs of interest by Grade — 70 mg vs 105 mg (Gr 1 / Gr 2 / Gr 3 / Gr 4 / Gr 5) Neutropenia¶ 79.3% | 84.0% Anaemia 34.5% | 40.0% Thrombocytopenia** 24.1% | 32.0% CRS 72.4% | 68.0% Infections†† 75.9% | 80.0% Rash‡‡ 34.5% | 56.0% Patients (%) • With the exception of rash, no substantial skin conditions, hair and nail changes or mucosal toxicities were observed • Low ICANS incidence: Single cases of Gr 1 and Gr 2 only (n=1 each in 105 mg cohort) Overall rates of AEs were generally comparable between dose groups, with a lower incidence of Gr 3-4 events and rash in the 70 mg cohort Data cut-off: June 12, 2025 [remainder of footnote largely illegible]: *Septic shock (treatment related). †Intracranial haemorrhage (not treatment related). ‡Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (not treatment related) and weight increased (treatment related) (n=1 each). §Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (treatment related) and infective exacerbation of chronic obstructive airways disease (not treatment related) (n=1 each). ¶Group term neutropenia, neutrophil count decreased and febrile neutropenia. **Group term thrombocytopenia and platelet count decreased. ††MedDRA System Organ Class Infections and Infestations. ‡‡MedDRA high-level terms rashes, eruptions and exanthems NEC, exfoliative conditions, dermatitis ascribed to specific agent, acnes, dermatitis and eczema, and bullous conditions.

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION Ravi Vij presents extended follow-up from CAMMA 1 Arm A evaluating a fixed-duration, modified (QW/2W/4W) cevostamab dosing regimen in BCMA-naïve patients with RRMM (N = 24). At a median follow-up of 47.5 months, ORR was 70.8%, with a ≥CR rate https://t.co/M4l3Rbt9yh

197 impressions · View post on X →

OncLive.com@OncLive

🧬 ORR of 86%-88% and >90% MRD negativity among complete responders, with median PFS and DOR not yet reached at ~20 months. New CAMMA 1 Arm B data on cevostamab and pomalidomide/dexamethasone in BCMA-naive R/R #mmsm from #IMS26 👇 @Myeloma_Society https://t.co/Jt4RSvP46D https://t.co/slW58VDeiA

198 impressions · View post on X →

PHASE 1B DATA Cevostamab Plus Pom-Dex Yields Durable Responses in BCMA-Naive Myeloma Extended follow-up from the phase 1b CAMMA 1 trial (NCT04910568) supported selection of doses moving into phase 3 testing. OBJECTIVE RESPONSE RATE: 86.2%-88.0% (70 mg vs 105 mg cevostamab + pom-dex, n=29 vs n=25) COMPLETE RESPONSE OR BETTER: 62.1%-64.0% (Comparable across both dose levels) MRD NEGATIVITY IN CR+ PTS: 92.3%-93.8% (Among MRD-evaluable responders, 10^-5 threshold, NGS) 18-MONTH PFS RATE: 66.0%-67.4% (Median PFS not yet reached at ~20 months of follow-up) Source: Spencer A, et al. Presented at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland. OncLive / OncLive.com

CAMMA 1DREAMM-9MajesTEC-3UKMRA RADAR

Abstract Sessions begin at 11:00 AM. Join us in Hall 5 for Abstract Session 3 or Lomond Auditorium for Abstract Session 4. #IMS26 https://t.co/HPzirIbOLS

23rd Annual MEETING & EXPOSITION - International Myeloma Society THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2026 | 11:00-12:00 Abstract Session 3 Co-chairs: Meral Beksac and Martin Kortum - Double hit ultra-high risk myeloma treated with Isa-VRD plus cyclophosphamide induction and Isa-VRD consolidation: QoL analysis of the UKMRA RADAR trial in newly diagnosed transplant eligible patients - Karthik Ramasamy - Updated safety and efficacy of ramantamig (Ram; JNJ-5322) at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), demonstrating feasibility of outpatient dosing (OPD) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) - Jeffrey Matous - DREAMM-9 Patient-Reported Vision-Related Function with Extended Belantamab Mafodotin Dosing Intervals with Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, Dexamethasone (BVRd) in Transplant Ineligible Multiple Myeloma - Hang Quach - A fixed-duration, modified cevostamab dosing regimen induces durable remissions that continue after completion in BCMA-naive pts with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): CAMMA 1 Arm A results - Amrita Krishnan - Overall Survival, Progression and Non-Relapse Mortality With Teclistamab Plus Daratumumab (Tec-Dara) vs Dara-Based Triplets in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): MajesTEC-3 Post Hoc Analysis - Luciano Costa Panelist photos shown: Dr. Beksac, Dr. Kortum, Dr. Matous, Dr. Ramasamy, Dr. Costa, Dr. Krishnan, Dr. Quach 23rd Annual MEETING & EXPOSITION - International Myeloma Society THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2026 | 11:00-12:00 Abstract Session 4 Co-chairs: Lugui Qiu and Niels van de Donk - Augmenting TRAIL-dependent apoptosis enables BCMA CAR-T cells to overcome resistance in multiple myeloma - Mansour Poorebrahim - First-in-human phase Ia/Ib study of QLS32015 (GPRC5DxCD3) in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): updated safety and efficacy data - Jian Cui - An AI-Designed BCMA/FcRL5 Targeting TriTE Overcomes Antigen Escape and Outperforms BCMA-Directed Therapy in Multiple Myeloma - Jessica Encinas Mayoral - A CD4-Dominant, T-Helper-Skewed T Cell State Underlies Movement and Neurocognitive Toxicity After BCMA-Directed CAR-T Therapy in Multiple Myeloma - Theresia Akhlaghi - Single-cell antigen:TCR mapping reveals tumor-specific effector T-cell responses in multiple myeloma - David Avigan Panelist photos shown: Dr. Akhlaghi, Dr. Avigan, Dr. Cui, Dr. Encinas Mayoral, Dr. Poorebrahim, Dr. Qiu, Dr. van de Donk

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION Andrew Spencer presents extended follow-up data from Arm B of the CAMMA 1 trial evaluating cevostamab + pom-dex in BCMA-naïve patients with RRMM (n = 54; 70 mg, n = 29; 105 mg, n = 25). ORR was 86.2% with cevostamab 70 mg and 88.0% with 105 mg, with ≥CR rates of 62.1% and 64.0%, respectively. At a median FU of ~20 months, median DOR and PFS were not reached in either cohort; 18-month PFS rates were 67.4% and 66.0%. Grade 3/4 AEs occurred in 82.8% and 96.0%, and Grade 3/4 infections in 17.2% and 40.0%, respectively. Triple step-up dosing was associated with fewer CRS events. The 70 mg cevostamab + pom-dex regimen with triple step-up dosing were identified as RP2Ds. Follow our live feed for more updates: https://t.co/OZWuHVlO9d Intended for HCPs. This congress coverage is independently supported through funding from pharmaceutical companies. A full list of our funders can be found on our website. Funders are allowed no influence. #MultipleMyeloma #myeloma #mmsm #MedEd #MedicalCongress @MonashUni

89 impressions · View post on X →

Response rates by target-dose level Bar chart, y-axis "Patients (%)" 0-100: 70 mg (N=29): ORR 86.2% (95% CI: 71.9-100). Stacked: PR 10.3%, VGPR 13.8%, CR 17.2%, sCR 44.8%. Brackets: CR+: 62.1%, VGPR+: 75.9% 105 mg (N=25): ORR 88.0% (95% CI: 73.3-100). Stacked: PR 12.0%, VGPR 12.0%, CR 20.0%, sCR 44.0%. Brackets: CR+: 64.0%, VGPR+: 76.0% Right table: | 70 mg (N=29) | 105 mg (N=25) Median time on study, months (range) | 20.2 (12.7-27.5) | 20.4 (3.3-27.3) Right box: Cevostamab plus pom-dex induced high ORR, VGPR+ and CR+ rates at both target doses. Response rates were comparable between dose groups. Data cut-off: June 12, 2026. [no slide number visible] DOR and PFS by target-dose level Left panel "DOR": Kaplan-Meier curve, y-axis "Survival probability (%)" 0-100, x-axis "Time from start of treatment (months)" 0-28. Two lines: 70 mg (N=29, blue), 105 mg (N=25, orange), with censored marks (+). Legend: Treatment group 70 mg (N=29), 105 mg (N=25), Censored. "Patients remaining at risk" table: 70 mg: 25, 24, 23, 23, 22, 22, 21, 18, 15, 8, 6, 7, 5, 3, 1, NE (at months 0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26,28... approx) 105 mg: 22, 22, 20, 20, 18, 17, 17, 16, 12, 6, 3, 5, 3, 1, NE Right panel "PFS": Kaplan-Meier curve, same axes, two lines 70 mg (N=29, blue), 105 mg (N=25, orange), censored marks. "Patients remaining at risk" table: 70 mg: 29, 28, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 21, 18, 16, 10, 6, 4, 3, 1, NE 105 mg: 25, 25, 23, 21, 21, 19, 18, 16, 9, 6, 6, 4, 3, 1, NE Summary table: | 70 mg (n=25) | 105 mg (n=22) [DOR columns] Median DOR, months (95% CI) | NR (NE-NE) | NR (15.0-NE) 18-month DOR, % (95% CI) | 74.0 (55.9-92.0) | 68.2 (48.7-87.6) | 70 mg (N=29) | 105 mg (N=25) [PFS columns] Median PFS*, months (95% CI) | NR (15.6-NE) | NR (16.9-NE) 18-month PFS, % (95% CI) | 67.4 (49.8-84.9) | 66.0 (46.7-85.3) Bottom banner: After a median follow-up of ~20 months, median PFS was not reached in both cohorts. 18-month DOR and PFS rates were generally comparable between dose groups. Data cut-off: June 12, 2026. *In entire cohort. Safety summary by target-dose level Left table: n (%) unless stated | 70 mg (N=29) | 105 mg (N=25) Median follow-up, months (range) | 20.2 (12.7-27.5) | 20.4 (3.3-27.3) Any Gr AE | 29 (100) | 25 (100) Gr 3-4 AE [highlighted] | 24 (82.8) | 24 (96.0) Serious AE | 17 (58.6) | 15 (60.0) Gr 5 AE excluding PD | 1 (3.4)* | 1 (4.0)dagger AE leading to discontinuation: Cevostamab | 2 (6.9)Dagger | 2 (8.0)section Pom | 8 (27.6) | 8 (32.0) Dex | 0 | 2 (8.0) Right chart "n (%) with AEs of interest by Grade" - horizontal tornado/butterfly bar chart, 70 mg (left, 100-0%) vs 105 mg (right, 0-100%), graded Gr1-Gr5 (color scale): Neutropenia[para]: 79.3% (70mg) vs 84.0% (105mg) Anaemia: 34.5% vs 40.0% Thrombocytopenia**: 24.1% vs 32.0% CRS: 72.4% vs 68.0% Infections[dagger dagger]: 75.9% vs 80.0% Rash[Dagger Dagger]: 34.5% vs 56.0% Bullets: With the exception of rash, no substantial skin conditions, hair and nail changes or mucosal toxicities were observed. Low ICANS incidence: Single cases of Gr 1 and Gr 2 only (n=1 each in 105 mg cohort). Bottom banner: Overall rates of AEs were generally comparable between dose groups, with a lower incidence of Gr 3-4 events and rash in the 70 mg cohort. Footnote: Data cut-off: June 12, 2026. *Septic shock (treatment related). daggerIntracranial haemorrhage (not treatment related). DaggerClear cell renal cell carcinoma (not treatment related) and weight increased (treatment related) (n=1 each). sectionDiffuse large B-cell lymphoma (treatment related) and infective exacerbation of chronic obstructive airways disease (not treatment related) (n=1 each). paragraphGroup term neutropenia, neutrophil count decreased and febrile neutropenia. **Group term thrombocytopenia and platelet count decreased. dagger daggerMedDRA System Organ Class Infections and Infestations. Dagger DaggerMedDRA high-level terms rashes, eruptions and exanthems NEC, exfoliative conditions, dermatitis ascribed to specific agent, acnes, dermatitis and eczema, and bullous conditions. CRS by step-up dosing regimen Left chart "Double step-up dosing (N=28)": Any Gr CRS: 22 (78.6); Gr 2+ CRS: 6 (21.4); Gr 3+ CRS: 1 (3.6) Bar chart, y-axis "Patients (%)" 0-100, x-axis categories: D1 0.3mg (Pre-phase), D2-4 3.3mg (Pre-phase), D8 70/105mg (Pre-phase), D1 70/105mg (C1+). Grade 1/2/3 stacked bars (approx values: D1 0.3mg ~25% mostly Gr1; D2-4 3.3mg ~53% mixed Gr1/2; D8 70/105mg ~50% mixed Gr1/2; D1 70/105mg (C1+) ~28% mixed Gr1/2/3). Right chart "Triple step-up dosing (N=26)": Any Gr CRS: 16 (61.5); Gr 2+ CRS: 2 (7.7); Gr 3+ CRS: 0 Bar chart, same axes, categories: D1 0.3mg, D2-4 1.2mg, D8 3.6mg, D9-11 70/105mg (Pre-phase), D1 70/105mg (C1+). (approx values: D1 0.3mg ~20%; D2-4 1.2mg ~42%; D8 3.6mg ~11%; D9-11 70/105mg ~33%; D1 70/105mg (C1+) ~18%). Legend: Gr 1, Gr 2, Gr 3 (shaded purple scale) Right table "n (%) with CRS who received tocilizumab or corticosteroids for CRS treatment": | Double step-up dosing (N=28) | Triple step-up dosing (N=26) Tocilizumab | 10 (35.7) | 2 (7.7) Corticosteroids | 12 (42.9) | 1 (3.8) Tocilizumab and corticosteroids | 6 (21.4) | 1 (3.8) Bottom banner: CRS was less common, with <10% Gr 2+ events and no Gr 3 events, in the triple step-up cohort compared with the double step-up cohort. Tocilizumab use was <10% in the triple step-up cohort. Data cut-off: June 12, 2026.

CARTITUDE-4

6 slides Full trial profile →

CARTITUDE-2 Cohort ACARTITUDE-4

#IMS26 Woohoo!! CARTITUDE-2 A: single-arm prelude to CARTITUDE-4, e.g. cilta-cel in 1-3 prior lines. 5-year PFS 54%, meaning CAR-T cured over half of myeloma pts (n=20) by IMWG/IMS criteria 👏👏 Of course CARTITUDE-4 with longer follow-up will be imperative to prove this. https://t.co/Q9LJ33jffW

2.2K impressions · View post on X →

#IMS26 #mmsm @SurbhiSidanaMD Management of rare AE associated with CAR-T in myeloma https://t.co/VAiw0VwE2Q

Samer Al Hadidi, MD,MS,FACP (@HadidiSamer) — #IMS26 — Parkinsonism: Treatment and Outcomes

Samer Al Hadidi, MD,MS,FACP (@HadidiSamer) — #IMS26 — IEC-Colitis: My Management Approach

Samer Al Hadidi, MD,MS,FACP (@HadidiSamer) — #IMS26 — Cerebellar Toxicity with GPRC5D CAR-T and BsAb: Dizziness-Ataxia Syndrome

CARTITUDE-4MonumenTAL-3

1.3K impressions · View post on X →

[Slide 1 - Parkinsonism with Cilta-cel, mechanism: potential on-target, off-tumor effect on basal ganglia] Cross-trial table (CARTITUDE-1 / CARTITUDE-4 / RWE USMMIC / RWE USMMIC-2): Incidence: 6% / 0.5% / 2% / 3% (23/766). Clinical features: tremor/bradykinesia/rigidity/gait difficulty (CARTITUDE-1, USMMIC, USMMIC-2), tremor/bradykinesia/rigidity (CARTITUDE-4), USMMIC-2 adds personality change. Median time to onset: 27 days (14-108) / 85 days / 30 days (13-69) / 32 days (6-277). Sources: Martin et al. J Clin Oncol 41:1265-1274, 2023. San-Miguel et al. NEJM 389:335-347, 2023. Sidana et al. Blood. 2025;145(1):85-97. Sidana S et al, ASH 2025, manuscript in preparation 2026. Cohen et al Blood Cancer J. 2022;12:32. Hosoya et al Blood 2025. [Slide 2 - Parkinsonism: Treatment and Outcomes] N=23 patients with Parkinsonism. Resolved or improved: 55%. Resolved: 30% (7). Improved: 22% (5). Median time to resolution: 29 days (range 7-427). Patient-level treatment/outcome grid (23 patients) showing treatments received (corticosteroids, IVIG, anakinra, ruxolitinib, tocilizumab, cyclophosphamide, dasatinib, intrathecal chemotherapy, high-dose methotrexate, anti-parkinsonian medication, other supportive/symptom care, no treatment documented) mapped against Favorable/Unfavorable/Unknown outcome. Source: Sidana S et al. Manuscript in preparation, 2026. [Slide 3 - IEC-Colitis: My Management Approach] Diagnosis: Clinical and Pathological - GI infectious work up (infections can co-occur); Endoscopy + biopsies (duodenum: 80%; including normal mucosa); Assess lymphocytic infiltrate for clonality and CAR-T presence. First line: Early treatment initiation is key; High-dose Cytoxan (1-2 g/m2): preferred for fit patients. Other options: Cyclosporine (target trough 300-400 ng/mL); Ruxolitinib; Biologics for IBD: infliximab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab. Supportive Care: Often need parenteral nutrition; Aggressive antimicrobial prophylaxis; If on steroids for >5-7 days, antifungal prophylaxis. [Slide 4 - Cerebellar Toxicity with GPRC5D CAR-T and BsAb: Dizziness-Ataxia Syndrome] Potential low-level expression in inferior olivary nucleus of medulla oblongata. Cross-trial table (Arlo-cel N=84 / MonumenTAL-3 Tal-DP/Tal-D / MonumenTAL-1 Monotherapy): Any-grade 12% / 15%/12% / 5%. Grade 3: 7% / 3%/2% / 0.5%. Median time to onset: 30.5 days / 292/326 days / ~114 days. Recovery/resolution: "4 resolved, but recurred; all active" / 10.8%/16.9% / 54.2%. Incidence: 12-14%; Early for CAR-T, risk increases over time for BsAb. Diagnosis and Treatment: Diagnosis is clinical; Talquetamab: Hold drug, if rechallenged after resolution use a lower dose; Arlo-cel: Consider cytotoxic therapy and JAK inhibitors, ~Parkinsonism. Sources: Bal S et al. Blood. 2026;148:1240-1250. Mailankody et al. N Engl J Med 387:1196-1206. Mina R et al. N Engl J Med. 2026;395:671-683. Janakiram M et al. Blood Cancer J. 2025;15:135.

CARTITUDE-4ImmunoPRISMMajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MonumenTAL-3RedirecTT-1

#IMS26 #mmsm Infections with BsAn and CAR-T therapies https://t.co/nGIR6yJM9B

[Slide 1 - Incidence and severity of infections across different approved BsAbs and CAR T trials, cross-trial compilation table] BsAbs late-line relapse (triple-class exposed) - trial/drug/All grade/Grade 3-4/Grade 5: MajesTEC-1/Teclistamab: 78.8% / 55.2% / 12.7%. MagnetisMM-3/Elranatamab: 69.9% / 39.8% / 6.5%. LinkerMM-1/Linvoseltamab: 75% / 48% / NR. MonumenTAL-1/Talquetamab: 66.2% / 14.5% / 1.4%. RedirecTT-1/Tec-Tal: 89% / 64% / 12%. BsAbs early-line relapse (1-3 prior lines): MajesTEC-9/Teclistamab: 82.8% / 41.6% / 5.5%. MajesTEC-3/Tec-Dara: 96.5% / 41.6% / 5.5%. MonumenTAL-3/Tal-Dara: 83.0% / 29.2% / 1.5%. MonumenTAL-3/Tal-Dara-Pom: 84.3% / 37.7% / 0.7%. CAR T late-line relapse: CARTITUDE-1/Cilta-Cel: All grade 58%, Gr3-4 20%, Gr5 NR. KarMMa/Ide-Cel: 69%, 22%, NR (#, deaths from AEs not otherwise specified 7% total). CAR T early-line relapse: CARTITUDE-4/Cilta-Cel: 59%, 24%, 4%. KarMMa-3/Ide-Cel: 56%, 22%, NR (*, death from AEs 6% total). "Infections remain a major safety concern with T-cell-redirecting therapies, particularly with continuous bispecific antibody treatment." Table provided for ease of viewing, no comparisons intended. Sources: Moreau P et al NEJM 2022; Lesokhin AM et al Nat Med 2023;29(9):2259-2267; Lee HC et al Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2026 Feb, 26(2):e201-e212,e8; Chari A et al NEJM 2022; Cohen Y et al Engl J Med 2025;392:138-49; Touzeau C et al N Engl J Med 2026;395:440-53; Costa LJ et al N Eng J Med 2026;394:739-52; Mina R et al N Engl J Med 2026;395:671-83; Einsele H et al, Lancet Oncol 2026;27:254-68; Ailawadhi S et al, Blood 2024 (144)23; Berdeja J et al, Lancet 2021;398:314-24; Munshi NC et al, N Engl J Med 2021 Feb 25;384(8):705-716. [Slide 2 - Pillars of infection prevention in patients receiving T-cell redirecting therapies] Table: Immune defect/risk -> Type of infection -> Preventive strategy. Lymphopenia/Neutropenia -> Bacterial infections/PJP, approx first 3-6 months -> Antiviral + PJP prophylaxis, G-CSF support. Immunosuppressive therapy (steroids, IL-6 blockage, cyclophosphamide) -> Bacterial infections/Sepsis/fungal infections/CMV -> Consider antibacterial/antifungal. B-cell aplasia/Hypogammaglobulinemia -> Bacterial/Viral (Respiratory virus, VZV/HSV)/CMV -> Immunoglobulin replacement, Vaccination. T-cell dysfunction -> Other opportunistic infections, Viral infections, fungal (in selected high risk patients) -> Fixed treatment duration/Schedule optimization. Sources: Rodriguez-Otero P et al, Lancet Oncology May 2024; O'Neill C, et al. eJHaem. 2023;4:811-822; Friedrich MJ, et al. Cancer Cell. 2023;41:711-725.e6; Frerichs KA et al, Blood Advances 2024; Mohan M et al, Blood Cancer Journal (2025) 15:74; Tix T et al, Molecular Therapy (2025)33:7; Richardson T et al, Blood Advances (2025) 9:6; Nath K et al, Blood Cancer Journal (2024) 14:88; Reynolds G et al, Blood advances (2023) 7:19; Banerjee R et al, Blood Advances (2025) 9:18; Dr Rodriguez Otero personal opinion.

CARTITUDE-4CERVINODREAMM-7DREAMM-8MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MonumenTAL-3MonumenTAL-6

Never a good time to be a myeloma patient but this is the best it has ever been! Remarkable results in early relapse setting! @mvmateos #IMS26 https://t.co/rNUviKkXc5

#IMS2026 how to approach at first relapse by @DrKrinaPatel https://t.co/2v1m6XsspR

CARTITUDE-4IMMAGINE-1

238 impressions · View post on X →

FIRST RELAPSE Why CAR T belongs earlier Maximize early kill, then return time to the patient 48% MRD-negative by day 56 62% vs 18% overall MRD negativity at 10⁻⁵ Deepest early cytoreduction ENGINEERED IMMUNE RESET Lymphodepletion reduces suppressive immune cells; one infusion delivers a large, activated population that expands in vivo. A fundamentally different biologic attack than continuous antibody exposure +11.6 point QoL advantage at month 12 Global health status: +10.1 with cilta-cel vs −1.5 with SOC Treatment-free runway, less ongoing supportive care, and a PFS2/OS advantage SURVIVORSHIP IS PART OF THE STRATEGY Track immune reconstitution, IVIG and infection needs, revaccination, late effects and return to life. CARTITUDE-4; Mina et al, Lancet Haematol 2025; Popat et al, Blood 2024; updated OS analysis, Lancet 2026 Emerging CAR T platforms show deep early responses Latest publicly reported datasets; populations and follow-up differ Dataset | Anito-cel iMMagine-1 | Arlo-cel early-line phase 1 | AZD0120 DURGA-1 | KLN-1010 inMMyCAR Platform / target | Ex vivo BCMA | Ex vivo GPRC5D | Ex vivo BCMA + CD19 | In vivo BCMA Patients | 117 evaluable | 24 evaluable, 31 treated | 23 evaluable | 18 dosed Prior lines | Median 5 | Median 2, 1-3 allowed | Median 4 | Not reported Follow-up | Median 12.6 mo | Median 18.3 mo | Median 3.9 mo | 6 pts ≥4 mo, first pt >10 mo ORR | 97% | 96% | 96% | 100% all evaluable CR / sCR | 68% | 67% | 78.3% | 4 sCR / 6 pts with ≥4 mo MRD negative at 10⁻⁵ | 93% (70/75 evaluable) | 56.3% MRD-negative CR | 94% (16/17 evaluable) | 100% all evaluable 12-month PFS | 79% | 74% | Not reported | Not reported Deep responses now extend from ex vivo platforms to first-in-human in vivo CAR T Patel K, ASH 2025 #256. Bal S, Haematologica 2026. Richard S, Blood 2025 #269. Ho J, ASCO 2026. Cross-trial comparisons are descriptive. MRD denominators and follow-up maturity differ. Take-home messages • CAR T belongs at first relapse for eligible patients, before disease biology and treatment burden narrow the opportunity. • Earlier-line cilta-cel delivers deep real-world responses, with 79% progression-free survival at 12 months. • Earlier referral preserves more active holding-therapy options and helps protect T-cell fitness before collection. • Sequence intentionally: use holding therapy while access is secured, collect early, then bridge to control disease before infusion. • The platform is expanding beyond conventional BCMA CAR T to GPRC5D, dual-target, and in vivo approaches. Refer early, collect early, and preserve the path to CAR T

How to treat myeloma at 1st relapse (#IMS26): 💡move BCMA CAR-T early 💡CARTITUDE-4: cilta-cel PFS 37.1 vs 10mo with SOC in high risk 💡German RWE: better PFS/CR, less neurotox at 1–3 vs >3 lines. 💡Earlier = more immune-fit marrow. 💡Goal: MRD-neg, off therapy → cure. #mmsm @Myeloma_Society

CARTITUDE-4

964 impressions · View post on X →

International Myeloma Society CARTITUDE-4 subgroup analysis: High risk vs Standard risk [PFS Kaplan-Meier plot] Patients progression free and alive, % vs Progression-free survival, months (0-45). Curves: High risk, Cilta-cel; Standard risk, Cilta-cel; High risk, SOC; Standard risk, SOC. Patients at risk rows shown [small print, not fully legible]. [OS Kaplan-Meier plot] Patients alive, % vs Overall survival, months (0-45). Curves: High risk, Cilta-cel; Standard risk, Cilta-cel; High risk, SOC; Standard risk, SOC. Patients at risk rows shown [small print, not fully legible]. PFS table: Cilta-cel SOC High risk, months (95% CI) 37.1 (26.7-NE) 10.3 (7.6-12.6) Standard risk, months (95% CI) NR (NE-NE) 20.6 (11.2-33.6) OS table: Cilta-cel SOC High risk, months (95% CI) NR (NE-NE) 38.0 (34.0-NE) Standard risk, months (95% CI) NR (NE-NE) NR (34.7-NE) The median follow-up was 33.6 months (range, 0.1-45.0). NR, not reached; SOC, standard of care. Sidana S, et al. ASCO 2025 International Myeloma Society RWE: Cilta-cel outcomes in earlier versus later lines German nationwide registry of standard-of-care cilta-cel, 2022-2025 OUTCOME EARLIER LINE (1-3 prior lines, n = 177) LATER LINE (>3 prior lines, n = 429) 12-month PFS 79% (95% CI, 71-87%) 70% (95% CI, 65-76%) Overall response rate 91% 88% Complete response 63% 54% Non-ICANS neurotoxicity 3% 8% Maintained CR was associated with 100% PFS at 12 months in both cohorts Gagelmann N, et al. J Hematol Oncol. 2026;19:46. doi:10.1186/s13045-026-01806-6 Nonrandomized registry analysis. The investigators did not perform formal comparisons between cohorts. International Myeloma Society CARTITUDE-4 TME: Patients With 1 or 2 pLOT vs 3 pLOT had a More Immunocompetent TME at Baseline - Patients with 1 or 2 vs 3 pLOT had a more immunocompetent TME at baseline, as suggested by higher levels of costimulatory molecules, CD4+ T-cell antigen-presenting machinery (MHCII), and TCRA pathway - Higher levels of these gene signatures in TME at baseline trended with longer PFS (data not shown) Earlier use of cilta-cel may support longer PFS by leveraging a more immunocompetent TME at baseline Baseline TME gene set enrichment scores grouped by pLOT [Box plots: Coactivation molecules (P<0.05, P<0.05, ns), Costimulatory receptors (P.adj<0.05, P<0.05, ns), MHCII pathway (P<0.05, ns, ns), TCRA pathway (P<0.05, P<0.05, ns); Enrichment score -1.0 to 0.8; groups 1 pLOT (n=49), 2 pLOT (n=57), 3 pLOT (n=36)] Cilta-cel, ciltacabtagene autoleucel; MHC, major histocompatibility complex; pLOT, prior line of therapy; TCRA, T-cell receptor activation; TME, tumor microenvironment. Presented by S Parekh at the 67th American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting; December 6-9, 2025; Orlando, FL, USA

IBEX

6 slides

@onc_ce@onc_ce

@SagarLonialMD @US_FDA 49) Also at #IMS2026: Jeffrey Zonder @Amyloid_Planet presented #IBEX (OA-43), a Ph 2 trial of #iberdomide + SC #daratumumab as post-#ASCT maintenance after dara-based induction. Interim data (n=21): no Gr4+ heme AEs; Gr3 #neutropenia peaked in C2 (52%), was 0% by C5–6. https://t.co/wDyUtjCzhb

800 impressions · View post on X →

Dr. Jeffrey Zonder@Amyloid_Planet

Sharing initial safety & interim efficacy results of the IBEX trial at #IMS26 on behalf of co-I’s from @karmanoscancer & @IndianaUniv. Iberdomide + SQ dara is well-tolerated as post-ASCT maint in #myeloma & improved depth of MRD in 8 of first 11 pts enrolled https://t.co/jBudAyPNh6

866 impressions · View post on X →

Hamza Hashmi (@hhashmi87) — #IMS26 — Safety: Kinetics of Neutropenia

Hamza Hashmi (@hhashmi87) — #IMS26 — Efficacy

Hamza Hashmi (@hhashmi87) — #IMS26 — Conclusions

IBEX (Iberdomide + Daratumumab post-ASCT maintenance) @Amyloid_Planet 🔬 #IMS26: IBEX: Iberdomide + daratumumab post-ASCT maintenance feasible 💡manageable neutropenia and MRD conversion in 6/9 evaluable pts at 12mo. 💡Early data (n=21), dose was amended mid-study https://t.co/rHudMgzNDl

549 impressions · View post on X →

[Slide 1 - IBEX study schema, NCT06107738, Karmanos Cancer Institute + Indiana University + Cedars Sinai + University of Michigan] n=42 MRD-evaluable patients (enrolled 46). Dara-containing induction, 90-150 days after ASCT, PR+ any MRD status. Iberdomide 0.75mg/d x21d (28-day cycles, no escalation) + SC Dara 1800mg QW(C1-2), Q2W(C3-6), Q4W(C7+), for 24 months (max 26 cycles) or progressive disease. Primary endpoint: sustained MRD(-) using 10^-5 cutoff, ClonoSEQ or EuroFlow @ 6,12,18,24 months. Key secondary: conversion MRD(+) to MRD(-), IMWG response category improvement rate, PFS/OS at 12/24 months, QoL/PRO (EORTC-QLQ-C30, EQ-5D-5L), safety. Exploratory: serial MRD-FIX, immune profiling. [Slide 2 - Safety: Kinetics of Neutropenia] Per-patient grid tracking neutropenia grade (1/2/3) by cycle (baseline-C6) at both 0.75mg and 1.0mg dose levels, with IBER dose reduction markers (n=3, 14%), dose increase (n=1, 5%), and G-CSF added (n=2, 10%). 2 additional patients had IBER dose reductions after cycle 6. [Slide 3 - Efficacy] Baseline to on-study response shift (Unknown/CR/VGPR/PR/PD categories) showing improvement, with 5/21 improved IMWG response category. Serial MRD measurements (n=13) tracked by patient (KCI-02 through KCI-17) at Baseline/6mo/12mo/18mo/24mo, color-coded by MRD depth (<10^-4 red, >=10^-4-<10^-3 orange, >=10^-3-<10^-6 light green, >=10^-6 dark green). 8/11 baseline MRD(+) patients became MRD(-) (>=10^-6 threshold implied); 3/9 patients achieved sustained MRD(-) status (marked with asterisk: KCI-02, KCI-06, KCI-09). [Slide 4 - Conclusions] IBER/DARA maintenance post-ASCT is generally well-tolerated: dose reductions for hematologic toxicity uncommon (15%); neutropenia most pronounced during C1-2 (weekly DARA dosing); infections common but most Gr1-2 (only 1 hospitalization); diarrhea less common, less severe than typical for LEN maintenance. Improvements in IMWG response and MRD status observed: sustained MRD(-) in 3/9 pts (33%) with >=1yr follow-up; 6/9 pts (67%) with >=1yr F/U currently MRD(-) (all MRD(+) at start). Enrollment is ongoing (27 patients). NCT06107738.

Henry C Fung| MM, lymphoma, leukemia & CART@HenrychihangFu1

Have fun in Glasgow! 🇬🇧🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Don’t get lost at #IMS2026—too much great science, too many simultaneous sessions! Follow the roadmap. Don’t miss the practice-changing data. And don’t forget your single malt…after the final session! 🥃😆 #MultipleMyeloma #mmsm #Medtwitter https://t.co/eCVPDMHoDu

DON'T GET LOST AT IMS 2026 GLASGOW - SEPTEMBER 23-26 THE MUST-SEE ROADMAP PEOPLE SCIENCE PROGRESS TOGETHER | BIGGER SCIENCE A BRIGHTER TOMORROW | GLASGOW WELCOMES A BRIGHTER TOMORROW THURSDAY - SEPT 24 5:00-6:00 PM - HALL 5 MRD & MAINTENANCE (MRD: DEEPER ANSWERS BRIGHTER TOMORROWS) - MIDAS: Isa-iberdomide - CASSIOPEIA: 5-year sustained MRD - GEM2014MAIN: MRD-guided stopping - IBEX: Iber-Dara post-ASCT FRIDAY - SEPT 25 3:00-5:00 PM - HALL 5 DO NOT MISS THE PLENARY - DO NOT MISS (BOLD SCIENCE CHANGES LIVES) - CERVINO: Etentamig vs standard therapy - PERSEUS: Does long-term PFS become OS? - EXCALIBER-RRMM: IberDd vs DVd - First-in-human CD19/BCMA in-vivo CAR-T SAME QUESTIONS. A BRIGHTER TOMORROW. SATURDAY - SEPT 26 8:30-9:30 AM - HALL 5 THE NEXT CELLULAR-THERAPY ERA (CELLULAR THERAPIES: REAL POTENTIAL FOR REAL PEOPLE) - Updated CEPHEUS MRD - BCMAxGPRC5D dual-target CAR-T - IASO206: IV in-vivo BCMA CAR-T 11:00 AM-12:00 PM - HALL 5 - Post-CAR-T elranatamab - Delayed cilta-cel neurotoxicity - MRD-guided T-cell redirection 11:00 AM-12:00 PM - LOMOND - CAR-T enterocolitis biology 1:00-2:00 PM - LOMOND - LV169: lentiviral in-vivo BCMA CAR delivery Same goal. Brighter lives. WHAT TO WATCH (DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES A CLEARER FUTURE) - Durability - OS - sustained MRD - infection burden - Access - treatment-free time - late toxicity - In-vivo CAR-T: insertion sites, off-target transduction, vector shedding & persistence Go for the randomized data and the biology--not every new response rate. Single malt only AFTER the final session. SAME CURIOSITY FURTHER TOGETHER | GREAT SCIENCE DESERVES A DRAM

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION Jeffrey Zonder, Wayne State University School of Medicine, shares interim data from the phase II IBEX study, evaluating iberdomide plus daratamumab as post-ASCT maintenance therapy in patients with MM (N = 21). At 12 months, 8/11 evaluable https://t.co/NYcM4tfbi4

122 impressions · View post on X →

Jeffrey Zonder, MD, shared results from the first trial of Dara-Iber as post-transplant maintenance. Interim analysis of ongoing IBEX study shows improved IMWG response and MRD status with Dara-Iber maintenance. @Amyloid_Planet #IMS26 https://t.co/Ab2pyzeM2s

615 impressions · View post on X →

MELT-MM

5 slides

1/🚀 #IMS2026: Can a CELMoD deepen and sustain responses to a BCMA bispecific in RRMM? Dr. Ja Min Byun presented updated Part 1 results from MELT-MM, evaluating mezigdomide + elranatamab. The early efficacy signal is striking—but needs context. 🧵 #mmsm MELT-MM enrolled https://t.co/0vuxo9zNzQ

1.0K impressions · View post on X →

#IMS26 #mmsm Oral- Elra+Mezi data -part 1 safety data ➡️Small n of pts ➡️very limited data on safety presented ~ 25% with G3/4 transaminitis 4/13 pts with G3 or higher infection Early efficacy looks good https://t.co/vCRYFW2A6s

133 impressions · View post on X →

Study schema (NCT06645678) Phase I/II RRMM patients with >=2 prior lines, including 1 PI and lenalidomide, ECOG 0-2 Part 1 (safety, boxed): Elranatamab 76mg weekly* + Mezigdomide TBD, q4 weeks x24 cycles (N=12) Part 2 (expansion): Elranatamab + Mezigdomide q4 weeks x24 cycles (N=63) Maintenance: Mezigdomide until progression *Weekly up to C6 -> if PR or better response after C6 then Q2W -> if CR or better response after C12 then Q4W Dosing timeline: Elranatamab 2 step-up dosing D1(12mg), D4(32mg), D8(76mg) SC 76mg C1+; D1,D4,D8 then D1,D8,D15,D22 (C1+ QW schedule) then D1,D15 (C7+ Q2W schedule if PR or better) through EOT Mezigdomide: QD D1-21, Reset D22-D28, per RP2D, all cycles starting with C1D1, through EOT Side notes: 3+3 dose escalation Phase 1b, starting mezigdomide dose at 0.3mg -> 0.6mg -> 1mg; Prior anti-BCMA exposure not allowed; Primary prophylaxis with peg-GCSF; Bactrim, acyclovir prophylaxis mandatory; IVIG use according to IgG level 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting, slide 4 Response rates Data cutoff (2026-Jul-31); Median FU duration from C0D1 13.7M (range 8.6-19.3M); Median time to response 17 days (11-45d), to best response 5.6M (3.3-5.9M) Per mezigdomide dose (VGPR/sCR stacked bars, % of patients): Total (13/13): 100% - VGPR 7.7%, sCR 92.3% (>=CR: 92.3%) MEZI 0.3mg (7/7): 100% - VGPR 14.3%, sCR 85.7% MEZI 0.6mg (6/6): 100% - VGPR 0%, sCR 100.0% In subgroups (VGPR/sCR stacked bars): Prior TCE - Yes (4/4): 100%, VGPR 0, sCR 100.0; No (9/9): 100%, VGPR 11.1, sCR 88.9 Triple class refractory - Yes (7/7): 100%, VGPR 0, sCR 100.0; No (6/6): 100%, VGPR 16.7, sCR 83.3 Penta-refractory - Yes (6/6): 100%, VGPR 0, sCR 100.0; No (7/7): 100%, VGPR 14.3, sCR 85.7 Soft tissue EMD - Yes (3/3): 100%, VGPR 0, sCR 100; No (10/10): 100%, VGPR 10, sCR 90 *NGS [LymphoTrack, Invivoscribe] MRD data available in 11/13 patients: 10^-5 MRD negative CR in 10/11 (90.9%) 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting, slide 7 Baseline characteristics Characteristics | Total (N=13) | Elra + Mezi 0.3mg (N=7) | Elra + Mezi 0.6mg (N=6) Median age, years (range) | 69 (51-76) | 69 (54-74) | 70 (51-76) Male, n (%) | 9 (69.2) | 6 (85.7) | 3 (50.0) Soft tissue EMD, n (%) | 3 (23.1) | 2 (28.6) | 1 (16.7) High cytogenetic risk, n (%) | 5 (38.5) | 2 (28.6) | 3 (50.0) R-ISS, I/II/III, n (%) | 7(53.8)/6(46.2)/0 | 4(57.1)/3(42.9)/0 | 3(50.0)/3(50.0)/0 ECOG PS, 0/1/2, n (%) | 4(30.8)/8(61.5)/1(7.7) | 3(42.9)/4(57.1)/0 | 1(16.7)/4(66.7)/1(16.7) IMWG frailty score, frail, n(%) | 2 (15.4) | 0 | 2 (33.3) Prior lines of tx, median (range) | 4 (2-7) | 4 (2-6) | 4 (2-7) Prior ASCT | 8 (61.5) | 5 (71.4) | 3 (50.0) Prior anti-CD38 mAb exposure | 7 (53.8) | 3 (42.9) | 4 (66.7) Prior TCE exposure | 4 (30.8) | 2 (28.6) | 2 (33.3) GPRC5D/CD3 | 3 | 1 | 2 FcRH5/CD3 | 1 | 1 | 0 Abbreviations: EMD, extramedullary disease; R-ISS, revised International Staging System; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; IMWG, International Myeloma Working Group; tx, treatment; ASCT, autologous stem cell transplantation; mAb, monoclonal antibody; TCE, T-cell engager 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting, slide 6 Treatment related adverse events Data cutoff (2026-Jul-31) Event, n (%) | Total (N=13) Any grade/Gr3-4 | Elra+Mezi 0.3mg (N=7) Any grade/Gr3-4 | Elra+Mezi 0.6mg (N=6) Any grade/Gr3-4 Any AE | 13(100)/13(100) | 7(100)/7(100) | 6(100)/6(100) Hematologic: Thrombocytopenia | 7(53.8)/7(53.8) | 3(42.9)/3(42.9) | 4(66.7)/4(66.7) Neutropenia | 11(84.6)/11(84.6) | 6(85.7)/6(85.7) | 5(83.3)/5(83.3) Febrile neutropenia | 0/0 | 0/0 | 0/0 Non-hematologic: CRS | 10(76.9)/0 | 5(71.4)/0 | 5(83.3)/0 ICANS | 0/0 | 0/0 | 0/0 Fatigue/weakness | 11(84.6)/1(7.7) | 5(71.4)/1(14.3) | 6(100)/0 Decreased appetite | 7(53.8)/0 | 4(57.1)/0 | 3(50.0)/0 Infection | 6(46.2)/4(30.8) | 4(57.1)/3(42.9) | 2(33.3)/1(16.7) Nausea | 5(38.5)/0 | 4(57.1)/0 | 1(16.7)/0 Liver enzyme elevation | 5(38.5)/3(23.1) | 1(14.3)/0 | 4(66.7)/3(50.0) Pyrexia | 5(38.5)/0 | 2(28.6)/0 | 3(50.0)/0 Skin rash | 4(30.8)/0 | 1(14.3)/0 | 3(50)/0 Arthralgia/bone pain | 4(30.8)/0 | 2(28.6)/0 | 2(33.3)/0 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting, slide 9

MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MELT-MMMonumenTAL-3MonumenTAL-6SUCCESSOR-2

#IMS2026 How to approach first relapse by @DrRakeshPopat https://t.co/3uXrSIgjY7

MELT-MM (Mezigdomide + Elranatamab) 🚀 #IMS26: Mezigdomide + elranatamab (MELT-MM): 💡100% ORR, 90% ≥CR! Striking numbers, but 💡n=13 evaluable pts and 10mo follow up-early days. 💡CRS in 77% (all low-grade) and CMV reactivation in 2/13, infection in 45% w IVIG use 💡worth watching as this combo augments responses in T-cell exhausted RRMM. #MultipleMyeloma #MMsm #Bispecific @Myeloma_Society

380 impressions · View post on X →

International Myeloma Society Response rates Data cutoff (2026-Jul-31) Median FU duration from C0D1 13.7 M (range 8.6-19.3M) Median time to response 17 days (11-45d), to best response 5.6M (3.3-5.9M) Per mezigdomide dose (Patients (%), VGPR / >=CR stacked bars): Total: 100% (13/13) — VGPR 7.7, >=CR 92.3 (bracket: >=CR: 92.3%) MEZI 0.3mg: 100% (7/7) — VGPR 14.3, >=CR 85.7 MEZI 0.6mg: 100% (6/6) — >=CR 100.0 In subgroups (all bars 100%): Prior TCE — Yes 100% (4/4) [bar split illegible]; No 100% (9/9) — 88.9 / 11.1 Triple class refractory — Yes 100% (7/7) [bar split illegible]; No 100% (6/6) — 83.3 / 16.7 Penta-refractory — Yes 100% (6/6) [bar split illegible]; No 100% (7/7) — 85.7 / 14.3 Soft tissue EMD — Yes 100% (3/3) — 100; No 100% (10/10) — 90 / 10 Legend: VGPR / >=CR [wording partially illegible] *NGS (LymphoTrack, Invivoscribe) MRD data available in 11/13 patients : 10^-5 MRD negative CR in 10/11 (90.9%) 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 7 International Myeloma Society Treatment related adverse events Data cutoff (2026-Jul-31) Event, n (%) | Total (N=13) Any grade / Gr 3/4 | Elra + Mezi 0.3mg (N=7) Any grade / Gr 3/4 | Elra + Mezi 0.6mg (N=6) Any grade / Gr 3/4 Any AE | 13 (100) / 13 (100) | 7 (100) / 7 (100) | 6 (100) / 6 (100) Hematologic Thrombocytopenia | 7 (53.8) / 7 (53.8) | 3 (42.9) / 3 (42.9) | 4 (66.7) / 4 (66.7) Neutropenia | 11 (84.6) / 11 (84.6) | 6 (85.7) / 6 (85.7) | 5 (83.3) / 5 (83.3) Febrile neutropenia | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 Non-hematologic CRS | 10 (76.9) / 0 | 5 (71.4) / 0 | 5 (83.3) / 0 ICANS | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 Fatigue/ weakness | 11 (84.6) / 1 (7.7) | 5 (71.4) / 1 (14.3) | 6 (100) / 0 Decreased appetite | 7 (53.8) / 0 | 4 (57.1) / 0 | 3 (50.0) / 0 Infection | 6 (46.2) / 4 (30.8) | 4 (57.1) / 3 (42.9) | 2 (33.3) / 1 (16.7) Nausea | 5 (38.5) / 0 | 4 (57.1) / 0 | 1 (16.7) / 0 Liver enzyme elevation | 5 (38.5) / 3 (23.1) | 1 (14.3) / 0 | 4 (66.7) / 3 (50.0) Pyrexia | 5 (38.5) / 0 | 2 (28.6) / 0 | 3 (50.0) / 0 Skin rash | 4 (30.8) / 0 | 1 (14.3) / 0 | 3 (50) / 0 Arrthralgia /bone pain | 4 (30.8) / 0 | 2 (28.6) / 0 | 2 (33.3) / 0 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 9 International Myeloma Society Complementary activity of ELRA + MEZI #1: Mezigdomide augments and sustains elranatamab-driven T-cell activation and effector function (patient sample analyses, N=13) Panel a: CD4+ : CD8+ ratio (% of T cells / % of T cells) across study visits C0D1, C0D8, C1D1, C1D8, C1D15, C3D1, CR (thin lines, individual patients) Panel b: CD8+ memory subset (% of CD8+ T cells) — EM, TEMRA, CM curves across study visits Panel c: CD4+ memory subset (% of CD4+ T cells) — EM, CM, Naive, TEMRA curves across study visits Panel d: Ki67+ cells (% of parent lineage) — up 3.68-fold, q=0.007 (red arrows at C0D8 and C1D8) Panel e: CD57+ KLRG1+ cells (% of parent lineage) — down 0.45-fold, q=0.007 (CD8, CD4) Panel f: Marker+ cells (% of CD8+ T cells) — HLA-DR, CD38, ICOS (ICOS up 1.70-fold, q=0.008), EOMES Panel g: IFN-gamma (pg/mL), C1D1 to C1D8 — [13.48-fold, 95% CI [illegible], q=0.013] [partially illegible] Panel h: Fold change C1D1->C1D8 by soluble analyte — all pairs (n=13), plasma->plasma (n=6) [partially illegible]; [4.3-fold, p=0.007] [partially illegible] 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 12

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION Ja Min Byun presents updated Part 1 results from the phase I/II MELT-MM study evaluating elranatamab + mezigdomide in patients with RRMM. The evaluable population included patients receiving mezigdomide 0.3 mg (n = 7) or 0.6 mg (n = 6). In the https://t.co/OFaZw28eTZ

5.1K impressions · View post on X →

Response rates Data cutoff (2026-Jul-31) Median FU duration from C0D1 13.7 M (range 8.6-19.3M) Median time to response 17 days (11-45d), to best response 5.6M (3.3-5.9M) Left bar chart "Per mezigdomide dose" (VGPR/sCR stacked, % Patients): Total: 100% (13/13) - VGPR 7.7, sCR 92.3 (bracket: >=CR: 92.3%) MEZI 0.3mg: 100% (7/7) - VGPR 14.3, sCR 85.7 MEZI 0.6mg: 100% (6/6) - VGPR 0, sCR 100.0 Right bar chart "In subgroups" (VGPR/sCR stacked, % Patients), by prior TCE / triple class refractory / penta-refractory / soft tissue EMD, Yes vs No: Prior TCE: Yes 100% (4/4) - VGPR 0, sCR 100.0 | No 100% (9/9) - VGPR 11.1, sCR 88.9 Triple class refractory: Yes 100% (7/7) - VGPR 0, sCR 100.0 | No 100% (6/6) - VGPR 16.7, sCR 83.3 Penta-refractory: Yes 100% (6/6) - VGPR 0, sCR 100.0 | No 100% (7/7) - VGPR 14.3, sCR 85.7 Soft tissue EMD: Yes 100% (3/3) - VGPR 0, sCR 100 | No 100% (10/10) - VGPR 10, sCR 90 Footnote: *NGS [LymphoTrack, Invivoscribe] MRD data available in 11/13 patients: 10^-5 MRD negative CR in 10/11 (90.9%) International Myeloma Society - 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting [Slide 7] Duration of response Data cutoff (2026-Jul-31) 10/13 patients remain on study: 1 discontinued d/t patient's decision; 2 d/t physician's decision Swimmer plot, y-axis: Mezi dose | Patient (SNU-S01 through SNU-S15, 13 rows), x-axis: Months from first infusion (COD1) 0-21. Rows (dose, patient, status): 0.3, SNU-S01, blue bar ending ~9mo with Death (X) marker, best response sCR (star) 0.3, SNU-S03, blue bar extending to ~19mo, ongoing (arrow), best response sCR 0.3, SNU-S02, blue bar extending to ~19mo, ongoing (arrow), best response sCR 0.3, SNU-S04, blue bar to ~10mo (End of treatment tick) then gray "survival follow-up after EOT" to ~17.5mo, ongoing (arrow) 0.6, SNU-S05, orange bar extending to ~14mo, ongoing (arrow), sCR 0.6, SNU-S06, orange bar extending to ~15.5mo, ongoing (arrow), sCR 0.6, SNU-S07, orange bar extending to ~15.5mo, ongoing (arrow), sCR 0.3, SNU-S09, blue bar to ~11mo then gray survival follow-up to ~12.5mo, Death (X) marker, sCR 0.3, SNU-S10, blue bar extending to ~14mo, ongoing (arrow), sCR 0.3, SNU-S11, blue bar extending to ~12.5mo, ongoing (arrow), sCR 0.6, SNU-S12, orange bar to ~9.5mo, ongoing (arrow), sCR 0.6, SNU-S14, orange bar to ~7.5mo, ongoing (arrow), sCR 0.6, SNU-S15, orange bar to ~9mo, ongoing (arrow), sCR Each row also marks First response (PR, triangle) and VGPR (diamond) and Best response (star). Legend: On study treatment - 0.3 mg (blue), On study treatment - 0.6 mg (orange), Survival follow-up after EOT (gray), VGPR (diamond), First response (PR, triangle), Best response (star), End of treatment (vertical tick), Follow-up ongoing (arrow), Death (X) International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting [Slide 8] Treatment related adverse events Data cutoff (2026-Jul-31) Table - Event, n (%) | Total (N=13): Any grade / Gr 3/4 | Elra + Mezi 0.3mg (N=7): Any grade / Gr 3/4 | Elra + Mezi 0.6mg (N=6): Any grade / Gr 3/4 Any AE | 13 (100) / 13 (100) | 7 (100) / 7 (100) | 6 (100) / 6 (100) Hematologic: Thrombocytopenia | 7 (53.8) / 7 (53.8) | 3 (42.9) / 3 (42.9) | 4 (66.7) / 4 (66.7) Neutropenia | 11 (84.6) / 11 (84.6) | 6 (85.7) / 6 (85.7) | 5 (83.3) / 5 (83.3) Febrile neutropenia | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 Non-hematologic: CRS | 10 (76.9) / 0 | 5 (71.4) / 0 | 5 (83.3) / 0 ICANS | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 Fatigue/weakness | 11 (84.6) / 1 (7.7) | 5 (71.4) / 1 (14.3) | 6 (100) / 0 Decreased appetite | 7 (53.8) / 0 | 4 (57.1) / 0 | 3 (50.0) / 0 Infection | 6 (46.2) / 4 (30.8) | 4 (57.1) / 3 (42.9) | 2 (33.3) / 1 (16.7) Nausea | 5 (38.5) / 0 | 4 (57.1) / 0 | 1 (16.7) / 0 Liver enzyme elevation | 5 (38.5) / 3 (23.1) | 1 (14.3) / 0 | 4 (66.7) / 3 (50.0) Pyrexia | 5 (38.5) / 0 | 2 (28.6) / 0 | 3 (50.0) / 0 Skin rash | 4 (30.8) / 0 | 1 (14.3) / 0 | 3 (50) / 0 Arrthralgia /bone pain | 4 (30.8) / 0 | 2 (28.6) / 0 | 2 (33.3) / 0 International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting [Slide 9] Infection Data cutoff (2026-Jul-31) Table - Parameter, n (%) | Total (N=13) | Elra + Mezi 0.3mg (N=7) | Elra + Mezi 0.6mg (N=6) Patients with infection | 6 (46.2) | 4 (57.1) | 2 (33.3) Upper respiratory tract | 3 (23.1) | 1 (14.3) | 2 (33.3) Lower respiratory tract | 4 (30.8) | 3 (42.9) | 1 (16.7) Gastrointestinal tract | 1 (7.7) | 1 (14.3) | 0 Ocular | 3 (23.1) | 2 (28.6) | 1 (16.7) Patient with viral infections CMV disease (retinitis) | 2 (15.4) | 2 (28.6) | 0 Respiratory viruses (influenza A) | 1 (7.7) | 1 (14.3) | 0 Patients with fungal infections | 1 (7.7) | 1 (14.3) | 0 International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting [Slide 10]

MIDAS

4 slides Full trial profile →

More exciting data from the IFM MIDAS trial at #IMS2026! Following Isa-KRd induction and ASCT, isatux + iber maintenance drove substantial MRD conversion during the 1st year, including at the deep 10⁻⁶ level. Another step toward MRD-driven maintenance in high-risk NDMM. https://t.co/qtHMAnshr2

MIDAS

1.2K impressions · View post on X →

MIDAS (Isa-Iberdomide maintenance) 🧬 #IMS26: MIDAS: Isatuximab + iberdomide maintenance drives MRD conversion in MRD-positive TE-NDMM pts post Isa-KRd: 💡MRD-neg (10⁻⁶) rates rising 40%→58%. 💡Encouraging depth, but only 1-yr data so far 💡will conversions translate into https://t.co/wbs0wW3grk

MIDAS

748 impressions · View post on X →

Henry C Fung| MM, lymphoma, leukemia & CART@HenrychihangFu1

Have fun in Glasgow! 🇬🇧🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Don’t get lost at #IMS2026—too much great science, too many simultaneous sessions! Follow the roadmap. Don’t miss the practice-changing data. And don’t forget your single malt…after the final session! 🥃😆 #MultipleMyeloma #mmsm #Medtwitter https://t.co/eCVPDMHoDu

DON'T GET LOST AT IMS 2026 GLASGOW - SEPTEMBER 23-26 THE MUST-SEE ROADMAP PEOPLE SCIENCE PROGRESS TOGETHER | BIGGER SCIENCE A BRIGHTER TOMORROW | GLASGOW WELCOMES A BRIGHTER TOMORROW THURSDAY - SEPT 24 5:00-6:00 PM - HALL 5 MRD & MAINTENANCE (MRD: DEEPER ANSWERS BRIGHTER TOMORROWS) - MIDAS: Isa-iberdomide - CASSIOPEIA: 5-year sustained MRD - GEM2014MAIN: MRD-guided stopping - IBEX: Iber-Dara post-ASCT FRIDAY - SEPT 25 3:00-5:00 PM - HALL 5 DO NOT MISS THE PLENARY - DO NOT MISS (BOLD SCIENCE CHANGES LIVES) - CERVINO: Etentamig vs standard therapy - PERSEUS: Does long-term PFS become OS? - EXCALIBER-RRMM: IberDd vs DVd - First-in-human CD19/BCMA in-vivo CAR-T SAME QUESTIONS. A BRIGHTER TOMORROW. SATURDAY - SEPT 26 8:30-9:30 AM - HALL 5 THE NEXT CELLULAR-THERAPY ERA (CELLULAR THERAPIES: REAL POTENTIAL FOR REAL PEOPLE) - Updated CEPHEUS MRD - BCMAxGPRC5D dual-target CAR-T - IASO206: IV in-vivo BCMA CAR-T 11:00 AM-12:00 PM - HALL 5 - Post-CAR-T elranatamab - Delayed cilta-cel neurotoxicity - MRD-guided T-cell redirection 11:00 AM-12:00 PM - LOMOND - CAR-T enterocolitis biology 1:00-2:00 PM - LOMOND - LV169: lentiviral in-vivo BCMA CAR delivery Same goal. Brighter lives. WHAT TO WATCH (DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES A CLEARER FUTURE) - Durability - OS - sustained MRD - infection burden - Access - treatment-free time - late toxicity - In-vivo CAR-T: insertion sites, off-target transduction, vector shedding & persistence Go for the randomized data and the biology--not every new response rate. Single malt only AFTER the final session. SAME CURIOSITY FURTHER TOGETHER | GREAT SCIENCE DESERVES A DRAM

In MIDAS trial, MRD-negativity rates improved after one-year isatuximab-iberdomide maintenance in MRD+ pts with newly diagnosed myeloma who had received single ASCT + Isa-KRd or tandem ASCT consolidation--- Aurore Perrot, MD, PhD @PerrotAurore #IMS26 https://t.co/QlNOkqgFYd

MIDAS

85 impressions · View post on X →

MonumenTAL-3

4 slides Full trial profile →

#IMS26 #mmsm @SurbhiSidanaMD Management of rare AE associated with CAR-T in myeloma https://t.co/VAiw0VwE2Q

CARTITUDE-4MonumenTAL-3

1.3K impressions · View post on X →

[Slide 1 - Parkinsonism with Cilta-cel, mechanism: potential on-target, off-tumor effect on basal ganglia] Cross-trial table (CARTITUDE-1 / CARTITUDE-4 / RWE USMMIC / RWE USMMIC-2): Incidence: 6% / 0.5% / 2% / 3% (23/766). Clinical features: tremor/bradykinesia/rigidity/gait difficulty (CARTITUDE-1, USMMIC, USMMIC-2), tremor/bradykinesia/rigidity (CARTITUDE-4), USMMIC-2 adds personality change. Median time to onset: 27 days (14-108) / 85 days / 30 days (13-69) / 32 days (6-277). Sources: Martin et al. J Clin Oncol 41:1265-1274, 2023. San-Miguel et al. NEJM 389:335-347, 2023. Sidana et al. Blood. 2025;145(1):85-97. Sidana S et al, ASH 2025, manuscript in preparation 2026. Cohen et al Blood Cancer J. 2022;12:32. Hosoya et al Blood 2025. [Slide 2 - Parkinsonism: Treatment and Outcomes] N=23 patients with Parkinsonism. Resolved or improved: 55%. Resolved: 30% (7). Improved: 22% (5). Median time to resolution: 29 days (range 7-427). Patient-level treatment/outcome grid (23 patients) showing treatments received (corticosteroids, IVIG, anakinra, ruxolitinib, tocilizumab, cyclophosphamide, dasatinib, intrathecal chemotherapy, high-dose methotrexate, anti-parkinsonian medication, other supportive/symptom care, no treatment documented) mapped against Favorable/Unfavorable/Unknown outcome. Source: Sidana S et al. Manuscript in preparation, 2026. [Slide 3 - IEC-Colitis: My Management Approach] Diagnosis: Clinical and Pathological - GI infectious work up (infections can co-occur); Endoscopy + biopsies (duodenum: 80%; including normal mucosa); Assess lymphocytic infiltrate for clonality and CAR-T presence. First line: Early treatment initiation is key; High-dose Cytoxan (1-2 g/m2): preferred for fit patients. Other options: Cyclosporine (target trough 300-400 ng/mL); Ruxolitinib; Biologics for IBD: infliximab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab. Supportive Care: Often need parenteral nutrition; Aggressive antimicrobial prophylaxis; If on steroids for >5-7 days, antifungal prophylaxis. [Slide 4 - Cerebellar Toxicity with GPRC5D CAR-T and BsAb: Dizziness-Ataxia Syndrome] Potential low-level expression in inferior olivary nucleus of medulla oblongata. Cross-trial table (Arlo-cel N=84 / MonumenTAL-3 Tal-DP/Tal-D / MonumenTAL-1 Monotherapy): Any-grade 12% / 15%/12% / 5%. Grade 3: 7% / 3%/2% / 0.5%. Median time to onset: 30.5 days / 292/326 days / ~114 days. Recovery/resolution: "4 resolved, but recurred; all active" / 10.8%/16.9% / 54.2%. Incidence: 12-14%; Early for CAR-T, risk increases over time for BsAb. Diagnosis and Treatment: Diagnosis is clinical; Talquetamab: Hold drug, if rechallenged after resolution use a lower dose; Arlo-cel: Consider cytotoxic therapy and JAK inhibitors, ~Parkinsonism. Sources: Bal S et al. Blood. 2026;148:1240-1250. Mailankody et al. N Engl J Med 387:1196-1206. Mina R et al. N Engl J Med. 2026;395:671-683. Janakiram M et al. Blood Cancer J. 2025;15:135.

CARTITUDE-4ImmunoPRISMMajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MonumenTAL-3RedirecTT-1

#IMS26 #mmsm Infections with BsAn and CAR-T therapies https://t.co/nGIR6yJM9B

[Slide 1 - Incidence and severity of infections across different approved BsAbs and CAR T trials, cross-trial compilation table] BsAbs late-line relapse (triple-class exposed) - trial/drug/All grade/Grade 3-4/Grade 5: MajesTEC-1/Teclistamab: 78.8% / 55.2% / 12.7%. MagnetisMM-3/Elranatamab: 69.9% / 39.8% / 6.5%. LinkerMM-1/Linvoseltamab: 75% / 48% / NR. MonumenTAL-1/Talquetamab: 66.2% / 14.5% / 1.4%. RedirecTT-1/Tec-Tal: 89% / 64% / 12%. BsAbs early-line relapse (1-3 prior lines): MajesTEC-9/Teclistamab: 82.8% / 41.6% / 5.5%. MajesTEC-3/Tec-Dara: 96.5% / 41.6% / 5.5%. MonumenTAL-3/Tal-Dara: 83.0% / 29.2% / 1.5%. MonumenTAL-3/Tal-Dara-Pom: 84.3% / 37.7% / 0.7%. CAR T late-line relapse: CARTITUDE-1/Cilta-Cel: All grade 58%, Gr3-4 20%, Gr5 NR. KarMMa/Ide-Cel: 69%, 22%, NR (#, deaths from AEs not otherwise specified 7% total). CAR T early-line relapse: CARTITUDE-4/Cilta-Cel: 59%, 24%, 4%. KarMMa-3/Ide-Cel: 56%, 22%, NR (*, death from AEs 6% total). "Infections remain a major safety concern with T-cell-redirecting therapies, particularly with continuous bispecific antibody treatment." Table provided for ease of viewing, no comparisons intended. Sources: Moreau P et al NEJM 2022; Lesokhin AM et al Nat Med 2023;29(9):2259-2267; Lee HC et al Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2026 Feb, 26(2):e201-e212,e8; Chari A et al NEJM 2022; Cohen Y et al Engl J Med 2025;392:138-49; Touzeau C et al N Engl J Med 2026;395:440-53; Costa LJ et al N Eng J Med 2026;394:739-52; Mina R et al N Engl J Med 2026;395:671-83; Einsele H et al, Lancet Oncol 2026;27:254-68; Ailawadhi S et al, Blood 2024 (144)23; Berdeja J et al, Lancet 2021;398:314-24; Munshi NC et al, N Engl J Med 2021 Feb 25;384(8):705-716. [Slide 2 - Pillars of infection prevention in patients receiving T-cell redirecting therapies] Table: Immune defect/risk -> Type of infection -> Preventive strategy. Lymphopenia/Neutropenia -> Bacterial infections/PJP, approx first 3-6 months -> Antiviral + PJP prophylaxis, G-CSF support. Immunosuppressive therapy (steroids, IL-6 blockage, cyclophosphamide) -> Bacterial infections/Sepsis/fungal infections/CMV -> Consider antibacterial/antifungal. B-cell aplasia/Hypogammaglobulinemia -> Bacterial/Viral (Respiratory virus, VZV/HSV)/CMV -> Immunoglobulin replacement, Vaccination. T-cell dysfunction -> Other opportunistic infections, Viral infections, fungal (in selected high risk patients) -> Fixed treatment duration/Schedule optimization. Sources: Rodriguez-Otero P et al, Lancet Oncology May 2024; O'Neill C, et al. eJHaem. 2023;4:811-822; Friedrich MJ, et al. Cancer Cell. 2023;41:711-725.e6; Frerichs KA et al, Blood Advances 2024; Mohan M et al, Blood Cancer Journal (2025) 15:74; Tix T et al, Molecular Therapy (2025)33:7; Richardson T et al, Blood Advances (2025) 9:6; Nath K et al, Blood Cancer Journal (2024) 14:88; Reynolds G et al, Blood advances (2023) 7:19; Banerjee R et al, Blood Advances (2025) 9:18; Dr Rodriguez Otero personal opinion.

CARTITUDE-4CERVINODREAMM-7DREAMM-8MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MonumenTAL-3MonumenTAL-6

Never a good time to be a myeloma patient but this is the best it has ever been! Remarkable results in early relapse setting! @mvmateos #IMS26 https://t.co/rNUviKkXc5

MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MELT-MMMonumenTAL-3MonumenTAL-6SUCCESSOR-2

#IMS2026 How to approach first relapse by @DrRakeshPopat https://t.co/3uXrSIgjY7

MajesTEC-9

4 slides Full trial profile →

CARTITUDE-4ImmunoPRISMMajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MonumenTAL-3RedirecTT-1

#IMS26 #mmsm Infections with BsAn and CAR-T therapies https://t.co/nGIR6yJM9B

[Slide 1 - Incidence and severity of infections across different approved BsAbs and CAR T trials, cross-trial compilation table] BsAbs late-line relapse (triple-class exposed) - trial/drug/All grade/Grade 3-4/Grade 5: MajesTEC-1/Teclistamab: 78.8% / 55.2% / 12.7%. MagnetisMM-3/Elranatamab: 69.9% / 39.8% / 6.5%. LinkerMM-1/Linvoseltamab: 75% / 48% / NR. MonumenTAL-1/Talquetamab: 66.2% / 14.5% / 1.4%. RedirecTT-1/Tec-Tal: 89% / 64% / 12%. BsAbs early-line relapse (1-3 prior lines): MajesTEC-9/Teclistamab: 82.8% / 41.6% / 5.5%. MajesTEC-3/Tec-Dara: 96.5% / 41.6% / 5.5%. MonumenTAL-3/Tal-Dara: 83.0% / 29.2% / 1.5%. MonumenTAL-3/Tal-Dara-Pom: 84.3% / 37.7% / 0.7%. CAR T late-line relapse: CARTITUDE-1/Cilta-Cel: All grade 58%, Gr3-4 20%, Gr5 NR. KarMMa/Ide-Cel: 69%, 22%, NR (#, deaths from AEs not otherwise specified 7% total). CAR T early-line relapse: CARTITUDE-4/Cilta-Cel: 59%, 24%, 4%. KarMMa-3/Ide-Cel: 56%, 22%, NR (*, death from AEs 6% total). "Infections remain a major safety concern with T-cell-redirecting therapies, particularly with continuous bispecific antibody treatment." Table provided for ease of viewing, no comparisons intended. Sources: Moreau P et al NEJM 2022; Lesokhin AM et al Nat Med 2023;29(9):2259-2267; Lee HC et al Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2026 Feb, 26(2):e201-e212,e8; Chari A et al NEJM 2022; Cohen Y et al Engl J Med 2025;392:138-49; Touzeau C et al N Engl J Med 2026;395:440-53; Costa LJ et al N Eng J Med 2026;394:739-52; Mina R et al N Engl J Med 2026;395:671-83; Einsele H et al, Lancet Oncol 2026;27:254-68; Ailawadhi S et al, Blood 2024 (144)23; Berdeja J et al, Lancet 2021;398:314-24; Munshi NC et al, N Engl J Med 2021 Feb 25;384(8):705-716. [Slide 2 - Pillars of infection prevention in patients receiving T-cell redirecting therapies] Table: Immune defect/risk -> Type of infection -> Preventive strategy. Lymphopenia/Neutropenia -> Bacterial infections/PJP, approx first 3-6 months -> Antiviral + PJP prophylaxis, G-CSF support. Immunosuppressive therapy (steroids, IL-6 blockage, cyclophosphamide) -> Bacterial infections/Sepsis/fungal infections/CMV -> Consider antibacterial/antifungal. B-cell aplasia/Hypogammaglobulinemia -> Bacterial/Viral (Respiratory virus, VZV/HSV)/CMV -> Immunoglobulin replacement, Vaccination. T-cell dysfunction -> Other opportunistic infections, Viral infections, fungal (in selected high risk patients) -> Fixed treatment duration/Schedule optimization. Sources: Rodriguez-Otero P et al, Lancet Oncology May 2024; O'Neill C, et al. eJHaem. 2023;4:811-822; Friedrich MJ, et al. Cancer Cell. 2023;41:711-725.e6; Frerichs KA et al, Blood Advances 2024; Mohan M et al, Blood Cancer Journal (2025) 15:74; Tix T et al, Molecular Therapy (2025)33:7; Richardson T et al, Blood Advances (2025) 9:6; Nath K et al, Blood Cancer Journal (2024) 14:88; Reynolds G et al, Blood advances (2023) 7:19; Banerjee R et al, Blood Advances (2025) 9:18; Dr Rodriguez Otero personal opinion.

CARTITUDE-4CERVINODREAMM-7DREAMM-8MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MonumenTAL-3MonumenTAL-6

Never a good time to be a myeloma patient but this is the best it has ever been! Remarkable results in early relapse setting! @mvmateos #IMS26 https://t.co/rNUviKkXc5

MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MELT-MMMonumenTAL-3MonumenTAL-6SUCCESSOR-2

#IMS2026 How to approach first relapse by @DrRakeshPopat https://t.co/3uXrSIgjY7

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | POSTER Katja Weisel, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, presented expanded PRO results from the MajesTEC-3 trial, which evaluated Tec+Dara (n = 291) vs DPd/DVd (n = 296), and the MajesTEC-9 trial, which evaluated Tec-mono (n = 293) vs PVd/Kd (n = https://t.co/jvkAdSA5ch

MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9

333 impressions · View post on X →

GEM2014MAIN

4 slides

GEM2014MAIN (MRD-guided maintenance discontinuation) 🎯 #IMS26: GEM2014MAIN: MRD-neg pts who stopped maintenance at 2yrs had median PFS not reached vs 3.5yrs for MRD-positive pts who continued. 💡50% remained progression-free at 7yrs. 💡Early MRD neg > late MRD neg 💡sustained https://t.co/TJI1PPYAf1

Hamza Hashmi (@hhashmi87) — #IMS26 — MRD negativity achievement is an independent prognostic factor for prolonged PFS

Hamza Hashmi (@hhashmi87) — #IMS26 — Half of patients who were MRD- at 2 years and discontinued maintenance remained alive and progression-free after 7 years, N=84

GEM2014MAIN

700 impressions · View post on X →

[Slide 1 - GEM2014MAIN: Discontinuation of Rd or IRd - patients who were MRD- at second year of maintenance (N=271), median follow-up 7.5 years] KM curves for PFS by MRD status at 2yr (T5), comparing Continue Lenalidomide vs Stop Lenalidomide within MRD- and MRD+ groups. Median PFS: Stop Lenalidomide (Not reached) vs Continue Lenalidomide (3.5 years), p<0.0001. At-risk table shown through year 9. [Slide 2 - MRD negativity achievement is an independent prognostic factor for prolonged PFS] Subgroup KM curves by ISS stage and cytogenetic risk, continue vs stop lenalidomide maintenance. Median PFS by ISS: Continue Maintenance ISS1 5.7yr, ISS2 5.9yr, ISS3 2.9yr (Stop Maintenance not reached). By cytogenetic risk: Continue Maintenance-HR CG 2.8yr, Continue Maintenance-SR CG 4.2yr (Stop Maintenance not reached). [Slide 3 - Half of patients who were MRD- at 2 years and discontinued maintenance remained alive and progression-free after 7 years, N=84] After 7 years of maintenance discontinuation: 3 patients had disease progression, 1 died without progression. PFS KM curve (Sustained MRDneg n=64 vs Variable MRD status n=20) shows Sustained MRDneg group staying near 95-100% through 1.5 years vs Variable MRD status group dropping to ~88%.

Henry C Fung| MM, lymphoma, leukemia & CART@HenrychihangFu1

Have fun in Glasgow! 🇬🇧🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Don’t get lost at #IMS2026—too much great science, too many simultaneous sessions! Follow the roadmap. Don’t miss the practice-changing data. And don’t forget your single malt…after the final session! 🥃😆 #MultipleMyeloma #mmsm #Medtwitter https://t.co/eCVPDMHoDu

DON'T GET LOST AT IMS 2026 GLASGOW - SEPTEMBER 23-26 THE MUST-SEE ROADMAP PEOPLE SCIENCE PROGRESS TOGETHER | BIGGER SCIENCE A BRIGHTER TOMORROW | GLASGOW WELCOMES A BRIGHTER TOMORROW THURSDAY - SEPT 24 5:00-6:00 PM - HALL 5 MRD & MAINTENANCE (MRD: DEEPER ANSWERS BRIGHTER TOMORROWS) - MIDAS: Isa-iberdomide - CASSIOPEIA: 5-year sustained MRD - GEM2014MAIN: MRD-guided stopping - IBEX: Iber-Dara post-ASCT FRIDAY - SEPT 25 3:00-5:00 PM - HALL 5 DO NOT MISS THE PLENARY - DO NOT MISS (BOLD SCIENCE CHANGES LIVES) - CERVINO: Etentamig vs standard therapy - PERSEUS: Does long-term PFS become OS? - EXCALIBER-RRMM: IberDd vs DVd - First-in-human CD19/BCMA in-vivo CAR-T SAME QUESTIONS. A BRIGHTER TOMORROW. SATURDAY - SEPT 26 8:30-9:30 AM - HALL 5 THE NEXT CELLULAR-THERAPY ERA (CELLULAR THERAPIES: REAL POTENTIAL FOR REAL PEOPLE) - Updated CEPHEUS MRD - BCMAxGPRC5D dual-target CAR-T - IASO206: IV in-vivo BCMA CAR-T 11:00 AM-12:00 PM - HALL 5 - Post-CAR-T elranatamab - Delayed cilta-cel neurotoxicity - MRD-guided T-cell redirection 11:00 AM-12:00 PM - LOMOND - CAR-T enterocolitis biology 1:00-2:00 PM - LOMOND - LV169: lentiviral in-vivo BCMA CAR delivery Same goal. Brighter lives. WHAT TO WATCH (DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES A CLEARER FUTURE) - Durability - OS - sustained MRD - infection burden - Access - treatment-free time - late toxicity - In-vivo CAR-T: insertion sites, off-target transduction, vector shedding & persistence Go for the randomized data and the biology--not every new response rate. Single malt only AFTER the final session. SAME CURIOSITY FURTHER TOGETHER | GREAT SCIENCE DESERVES A DRAM

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION David Moreno presents long-term results from the GEM2014MAIN study evaluating MRD-guided discontinuation of maintenance therapy in NDMM. Patients who were MRD-negative (10⁻⁶) after 2 years of maintenance discontinued therapy. At a median https://t.co/Kj3lxufsED

GEM2014MAIN

347 impressions · View post on X →

David Moreno, MD, PhD, shares GEM2014MAIN results. Pts with sustained MRD-neg at year 5 after 2-year len maintenance had prolonged PFS, compared to those who were MRD-neg at year 2 but converted to MRD+ at year 5. #IMS26 https://t.co/vdTtMkfCJs

GEM2014MAIN

254 impressions · View post on X →

Anito-cel-Phase1

4 slides

Watching the PFS tail mature across BCMA CAR-T studies: anito-cel, cilta-cel (CARTITUDE-1), and ide-cel (KarMMa-1). The durability is striking—but this is a descriptive cross-trial comparison, not head-to-head evidence. #IMS26 #mmsm #myeloma #MedEd #medtwitter #USMIRC https://t.co/i5TsKuVVez

2.0K impressions · View post on X →

#IMS26 Just read through @NEJM anito-cel paper. 🐘 in room is of course vs cilta-cel / CARTITUDE-1. I'm always guilty of cross-trial comparisons, but here even I would advise against it... Relevant para(graphs) below. In world where we now bridge to ⬇️ myeloma, bridging success https://t.co/Z1pxl0auKX https://t.co/moACIjxj5e

6.5K impressions · View post on X →

And with it, finally a new graphic to use for the different BCMA CAR-T therapies as opposed to the same one that all of you at #IMS26 can pick out from a mile away 👏 Congrats @MJFzeta et al on @NEJM paper and to @YiLinMDPhD for this very nice anito-cel editorial! https://t.co/isSV4RJL4D https://t.co/uPou1q22Cy

8.4K impressions · View post on X →

At time of #IMS26 #mmsm Anito cel phase I study published in @NEJM ➡️n=38 pts, median F/U : ~ 3yrs, 2 patients (5%) removed from analysis post enrollment even after successful manufacturing👇 ➡️ 2-yr PFS: 57%, median PFS: 2.5 yrs, 3-yrs OS: 65% 🛑Unfortunately no data on G2 https://t.co/U4LSBAlnDF

1.8K impressions · View post on X →

Table 1. Characteristics of the Patients at Baseline.* Characteristic | Dose Level 1 (N=32) | Dose Level 2 (N=6) | Total (N=38) Age Median (range) - yr | 66 (44-76) | 60 (52-65) | 66 (44-76) >=65 yr - no. (%) | 19 (59) | 1 (17) | 20 (53) Sex - no. (%) Male | 18 (56) | 5 (83) | 23 (61) Female | 14 (44) | 1 (17) | 15 (39) Race - no. (%) [dagger] White | 28 (88) | 4 (67) | 32 (84) Black | 3 (9) | 1 (17) | 4 (11) Asian | 1 (3) | 0 | 1 (3) Other | 0 | 1 (17) | 1 (3) ECOG performance-status score - no. (%) [double dagger] 0 | 9 (28) | 3 (50) | 12 (32) 1 | 23 (72) | 3 (50) | 26 (68) High-risk prognostic features - no. (%) Extramedullary disease [section] | 9 (28) | 3 (50) | 12 (32) Bone marrow plasma cells >=60% [paragraph] | 8 (25) | 4 (67) | 12 (32) Beta2-microglobulin level >=5.5 mg/liter [paragraph] | 5 (16) | 2 (33) | 7 (18) High-risk cytogenetic abnormality [double vertical bar] | 9 (28) | 2 (33) | 11 (29) High-risk cytogenetic abnormality inclusive of 1q gain | 21 (66) | 5 (83) | 26 (68) Median no. of previous lines of therapy (range) | 5 (3-7) | 4 (3-14) | 4 (3-14) Triple-class-refractory disease - no. (%)** | 32 (100) | 6 (100) | 38 (100) Penta-drug-refractory disease - no. (%) [dagger dagger] | 21 (66) | 5 (83) | 26 (68) Previous autologous stem-cell transplantation - no. (%) | 24 (75) | 4 (67) | 28 (74) Previous BCMA-directed therapy - no. (%) [double dagger double dagger] | 1 (3) | 0 | 1 (3) Median time since diagnosis (range) - yr | 6.5 (1.5-14.9) | 6.9 (1.7-11.0) | 6.5 (1.5-14.9) Bridging therapy - no. (%) | 22 (69) | 6 (100) | 28 (74) Footnotes: * Patients in the dose level 1 cohort received 100x10^6 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells, and those in the dose level 2 cohort received 300x10^6 CAR T cells. Percentages may not total 100 because of rounding. dagger Race was reported by the patient. double dagger Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance-status scores are assessed on a scale from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater disability. section Extramedullary disease was defined as the presence of a non-bone-based plasmacytoma at the screening or baseline visit. paragraph Data are according to the worse value observed at the screening or baseline visit. double vertical bar High-risk cytogenetic abnormality was defined as the presence of del 17p, t(14;16), or t(4;14). ** Triple-class-refractory disease was defined as disease refractory to an immunomodulatory agent, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. dagger dagger Penta-drug-refractory disease was defined as disease refractory to at least two unique immunomodulatory drugs, two unique proteasome inhibitors, and one anti-CD38 therapy. double dagger double dagger B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed therapy was defined as a BCMA-directed antibody-drug conjugate. Figure S1. Patient Disposition. Flow diagram: Enrolled & Leukapheresed n=40 -> Successful Manufacture of Anito-cel n=40 -> [Discontinued: Infection, n=1] -> Lymphodepletion n=39 -> [Discontinued: Hypoxia/Heart Failure, n=1] -> Total Dosed n=38 -> Dose level 1: 100 x 10^6 CAR+ T cells, n=32; Dose Escalation, n=6; Expansion Cohort, n=26 -> Dose level 2: 300 x 10^6 CAR+ T cells, n=6; Dose Escalation, n=6 4-panel NEJM Kaplan-Meier figure. Panel A - Progression-free Survival among All Patients: KM curve, y-axis "Percentage of Patients" 0-100, x-axis "Months" 0-60. Table: No. of Patients | Median Progression-free Survival (95% CI), mo: All Patients 38 | 30.2 (16.6-36.2). No. at Risk: 38, 34, 28, 24, 19, 13, 7, 3, 2, 0, 0 (at 0,6,12,18,24,30,36,42,48,54,60 mo approx). Panel B - Overall Survival among All Patients: KM curve, same x-axis. Table: No. of Patients | Median Overall Survival (95% CI), mo: All Patients 38 | NR (33.3-NE). No. at Risk: 38, 37, 36, 31, 30, 23, 17, 8, 5, 2, 0. Panel C - Progression-free Survival According to Presence or Absence of Extramedullary Disease: KM curves for All patients (black), EMD (red), No EMD (blue), x-axis Months 0-51. Table: No. of Patients | Median PFS (95% CI), mo: All Patients 38 | 30.2 (16.6-36.2); EMD 12 | 36.2 (10.2-NE); No EMD 26 | 27.9 (16.0-34.3). No. at Risk: All patients 38,38,34,28,26,24,23,19,18,13,12,7,5,3,2,2,0; EMD 12,12,10,10,7,7,7,5,5,5,5,3,2,2,0; No EMD 26,26,24,21,19,17,16,14,13,8,7,4,3,0,0,0,0 (approx per time points shown). Panel D - Progression-free Survival According to Beta2-Microglobulin Level: KM curves for All patients (black), Beta2M <5.5 mg/liter (purple), Beta2M >=5.5 mg/liter (green), x-axis Months 0-51. Table: No. of Patients | Median PFS (95% CI), mo: All Patients 38 | 30.2 (16.6-36.2); Beta2M >=5.5 mg/liter 7 | 30.2 (11.0-NE); Beta2M <5.5 mg/liter 31 | 27.9 (16.0-39.9). No. at Risk: All patients 38,38,34,28,26,24,23,19,18,13,12,7,5,3,2,2,0; Beta2M >=5.5 mg/liter 7,7,7,7,6,5,4,4,4,2,1,0,0,0,0,0,0; Beta2M <5.5 mg/liter 31,31,27,21,20,19,19,15,14,11,11,7,5,3,2,2,0.

LINKER-SMM1

4 slides

CancerNetwork®@CancerNetwrk

In the LINKER-SMM1 trial, single-agent linvoseltamab produced a 100% overall response rate among evaluable patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. https://t.co/K0GJ2Lkd5C #mmsm #myeloma #IMS2026 https://t.co/WHel74Axf9

447 impressions · View post on X →

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | POSTER Paula Rodriguez-Otero, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, presented updated results from the open-label phase II LINKER-SMM1 trial evaluating linvoseltamab monotherapy in adults with HR-SMM (N = 40). At a median follow-up of 13.3 months, the ORR was https://t.co/ltQxPZODVr

212 impressions · View post on X →

OncLive.com@OncLive

A 100% MRD negativity rate and an 85% complete response rate: linvoseltamab just showed what early intervention in high-risk smoldering myeloma could look like @mvmateos @Myeloma_Society #IMS26 #mmsm https://t.co/XmKoX0G6Eg https://t.co/lP7KFCvVCp

662 impressions · View post on X →

OncLive PHASE 2 LINKER-SMM1 TRIAL Linvoseltamab Yields Deep, MRD-Negative Responses in High-Risk Smoldering Myeloma Single-agent, fixed-duration linvoseltamab-gcpt (Lynozyfic) produced deep, durable responses with manageable safety in patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (N = 40) in the phase 2 LINKER-SMM1 trial. 100% Objective response rate among response-evaluable patients (n = 39) 85% Complete response or better - 97% achieved ≥VGPR; 13.3-mo median follow-up 100% MRD negativity (10-5) among all MRD-evaluable patients 45% Cytokine release syndrome - predominantly grade 1; no ICANS observed Grade 3 infections occurred in 20% of patients (no grade 4 infections); grade ≥3 TEAEs occurred in 70% of patients, with neutropenia the most common. No new safety signal. Source: Rodriguez-Otero P, Mateos M-V, et al. Presented at the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting & Exposition; September 23-26, 2026; Glasgow, Scotland. OncLive.com

At 12:00 PM in Alsh: Poster Discussion. #IMS26 https://t.co/e3rEkDMfit

186 impressions · View post on X →

International Myeloma Society 23rd Annual MEETING & EXPOSITION September 23-26, 2026 . Glasgow, Scotland WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2026 | 12:00-12:50 Poster Discussion Co-chairs: Masahiro Abe, Eileen Boyle, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Peter Voorhees Updated safety and efficacy results for linvoseltamab (LINVO) in patients (pts) with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (HR-SMM): Phase 2 LINKER-SMM1 trial Paula Rodriguez-Otero Functional implications of FCRL5 mutations for cevostamab immune escape in multiple myeloma Umair Munawar Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) of efficacy and safety outcomes for anitocabtagene autoleucel versus ciltacabtagene autoleucel in 4L+ relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) Surbhi Sidana Prognostic Impact of [18F] FDG PET/CT Before and After BCMA-Directed CAR T-Cell Therapy in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Multicenter Analysis Luis-Esteban Tamariz-Amador Second Primary Malignancies After Autologous Transplantation for Multiple Myeloma in the Modern Treatment Era: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Prognostic Impact Using a Competing-Risk Approach Damian Mikulski Efficacy and Safety of Daratumumab Plus VCd in Newly Diagnosed Amyloid Light-chain Amyloidosis with Cardiac Involvement: A Pooled Analysis of Asian Patients from AMY2009 and AMY3001 Jin Lu POLB 001, an oral p38 MAPK inhibitor for the prevention of cytokine release syndrome Liam Tremble Proteogenomic Integration Reveals Predictive Signatures of Ibrutinib Response in Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia Christos Vlachos Latent Effector T Cells Mediate Immunotherapy Responses in the Bone Marrow Microenvironment Niklas Kehl ALTITUDE - ALTernating Induction Therapies to achieve Undetectable Disease Endpoints: Ph 1/2 Dara-RVd/Teclistamab-RVd in Transplant Eligible Standard-Risk Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Neha Korde [Photo captions] Dr. Abe / Dr. Boyle / Dr. Goldschmidt / Dr. Kehl / Dr. Korde / Dr. Lu / Dr. Mikulski / Dr. Munawar / Dr. Rodriguez-Otero / Dr. Sidana / Dr. Tamariz-Amador / Dr. Tremble / Dr. Vlachos / Dr. Voorhees

CEPHEUS

4 slides Full trial profile →

Henry C Fung| MM, lymphoma, leukemia & CART@HenrychihangFu1

Have fun in Glasgow! 🇬🇧🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Don’t get lost at #IMS2026—too much great science, too many simultaneous sessions! Follow the roadmap. Don’t miss the practice-changing data. And don’t forget your single malt…after the final session! 🥃😆 #MultipleMyeloma #mmsm #Medtwitter https://t.co/eCVPDMHoDu

DON'T GET LOST AT IMS 2026 GLASGOW - SEPTEMBER 23-26 THE MUST-SEE ROADMAP PEOPLE SCIENCE PROGRESS TOGETHER | BIGGER SCIENCE A BRIGHTER TOMORROW | GLASGOW WELCOMES A BRIGHTER TOMORROW THURSDAY - SEPT 24 5:00-6:00 PM - HALL 5 MRD & MAINTENANCE (MRD: DEEPER ANSWERS BRIGHTER TOMORROWS) - MIDAS: Isa-iberdomide - CASSIOPEIA: 5-year sustained MRD - GEM2014MAIN: MRD-guided stopping - IBEX: Iber-Dara post-ASCT FRIDAY - SEPT 25 3:00-5:00 PM - HALL 5 DO NOT MISS THE PLENARY - DO NOT MISS (BOLD SCIENCE CHANGES LIVES) - CERVINO: Etentamig vs standard therapy - PERSEUS: Does long-term PFS become OS? - EXCALIBER-RRMM: IberDd vs DVd - First-in-human CD19/BCMA in-vivo CAR-T SAME QUESTIONS. A BRIGHTER TOMORROW. SATURDAY - SEPT 26 8:30-9:30 AM - HALL 5 THE NEXT CELLULAR-THERAPY ERA (CELLULAR THERAPIES: REAL POTENTIAL FOR REAL PEOPLE) - Updated CEPHEUS MRD - BCMAxGPRC5D dual-target CAR-T - IASO206: IV in-vivo BCMA CAR-T 11:00 AM-12:00 PM - HALL 5 - Post-CAR-T elranatamab - Delayed cilta-cel neurotoxicity - MRD-guided T-cell redirection 11:00 AM-12:00 PM - LOMOND - CAR-T enterocolitis biology 1:00-2:00 PM - LOMOND - LV169: lentiviral in-vivo BCMA CAR delivery Same goal. Brighter lives. WHAT TO WATCH (DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES A CLEARER FUTURE) - Durability - OS - sustained MRD - infection burden - Access - treatment-free time - late toxicity - In-vivo CAR-T: insertion sites, off-target transduction, vector shedding & persistence Go for the randomized data and the biology--not every new response rate. Single malt only AFTER the final session. SAME CURIOSITY FURTHER TOGETHER | GREAT SCIENCE DESERVES A DRAM

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION Sonja Zweegman, Amsterdam UMC, shares long-term data from the phase III CEPHEUS trial, investigating daratumumab plus bortezomid, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DVRd) vs VRd in patients with TI or TD NDMM (N = 395). At median FU of 76 months, https://t.co/dJJu4LqylW

CEPHEUS

803 impressions · View post on X →

Sonja Zweegman, MD, PhD, shared final MRD data from ph3 CEPHEUS trial w/ over 6-yr f/u. Dara-VRd continues to deepen responses & sustains MRD-negativity with improved PFS, supporting durable disease control. #IMS26 https://t.co/hMFVkiEgtw

CEPHEUS

268 impressions · View post on X →

NCT04751877 trial: Updated data from IMS 2026 (@Myeloma_Society) in 1L MM: anti-CD38 mAbs landscape, adapted from Dr. Akhil Santhosh (@tuttsakhil) 👉 https://t.co/V8wOYggpnM Updated landscape 👉 https://t.co/fUETXB1mH1 Learn more about NCT04751877: https://t.co/YYmevH13Fd #LARVOL #IMS2026 #InternationalMyelomaSociety #Myeloma #MMSM #HematologicOncology #Hematology #BloodCancers #CancerResearch #CancerData #Oncology #OncologyInsights #ClinicalTrials | @mtmdphd | @szusmani | @RahulBanerjeeMD | | @End_myeloma | @VincentRK

CEPHEUSIMROZPERSEUS

277 impressions · View post on X →

Updated NCT04751877 Data in 1L MM: anti-CD38 mAbs - IMS 2026 Trials: Perseus (EMN) | IMROZ (sanofi) | NCT04751877 (CHU Poitiers) | CEPHEUS (Janssen, Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson) Treatment Regimen: Perseus: Daratumumab + Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone vs Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone IMROZ: Isatuximab + Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone vs Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone NCT04751877: Isatuximab + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone +/- Bortezomib vs Isatuximab + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone CEPHEUS: Isatuximab + Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone vs Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone Median Follow-Up: Perseus: 47.5 months | IMROZ: 59.7 months | NCT04751877: 48.9 months | CEPHEUS: 76.0 months PFS: Perseus: 48 mo: 84.3% vs 67.7% IMROZ: 60 mo: 63.2% vs 45.2% NCT04751877: 18 mo: 87.2% vs 85.5%; 24 mo: 85.2% vs 80%; 36 mo: 78% vs 72.3%; 48 mo: 74% vs 65.7% CEPHEUS: 54 mo: 68.1% vs 49.5%; 72 mo: 59.3% vs 38.3% ORR%: Perseus: 96.6% vs 93.8% | IMROZ: 91.3% vs 92.3% | NCT04751877: 85% vs 78% | CEPHEUS: 97% vs 93% MRD negativity rate: Perseus: 75.2% vs 47.5% | IMROZ: 58.1% vs 43.6% | NCT04751877: 12 mo: 51% vs 21% | CEPHEUS: 61.1% vs 40% ≥CR rate: Perseus: 87.9% vs 70.1% | IMROZ: 74.7% vs 64.1% | NCT04751877: 58% vs 31% | CEPHEUS: 80.6% vs 61.4% Adapted from Dr. Akhil Santhosh (X 2025) LARVOL

ProMMise

3 slides

Mehak Trehan@mehak_trehan

Can belantamab monitoring become simpler? Prof. Rakesh Popat (@DrRakeshPopat) presenting the ProMMise D trial at #IMS2026: the symptom-based VRAT showed a 98.2% negative predictive value for significant ocular toxicity, while reduced-frequency BVd (Q8W → Q12W) was well https://t.co/AQ9qpZm5bz

ProMMise

297 impressions · View post on X →

Photo of auditorium screen, slide "Conclusions" (UKMRA - UK Myeloma Research Alliance): - The VRAT demonstrated a high negative predictive value (98.2%) for detecting significant ocular adverse events with BVd - This may be an effective method of detecting significant keratopathy and visual acuity changes without the need for ocular examination - A lower positive predictive value suggests a conservative approach - There may be dose holds in the absence of significant keratopathy - The VRAT may be subjective to patient/HCP interpretation - Training is required of the questionnaire to ensure accuracy and reproducibility - Confirmatory data will be provided by the ongoing Stage 2 - Assessment of VRAT safety in the absence of ocular examinations - Reduced frequency BVd schedule was well tolerated - Belamaf Q8W followed by Q12W maintenance with weekly bortezomib associated with few dose modifications and interruptions HCP: Health Care Professional

ProMMise: VRAT-guided Belamaf dosing 👁️ #IMS2026: ProMMise shows the patient-reported VRAT tool flags ocular AEs in pts on belamaf 💡Q8W dosing well tolerated (8.6% dose reductions). 💡Small Stage 1 cohort (n=40) 💡high NPV 98%, low PPV 20% 💡Will be interesting to see if VRAT-only dosing in Stage 2 hold up without any mandated eye exams as a safety net? #MultipleMyeloma #MMsm #Belamaf @Myeloma_Society @DrRakeshPopat

ProMMise

93 impressions · View post on X →

International Myeloma Society ProMMise: Study Schema UKMRA UK Myeloma Research Alliance Relapsed myeloma 1-3 prior lines of therapy -> Stage 1: BelaMaf* + bortezomib + dexamethasone, N=40 - Eye symptom questionnaire (VRAT) - Ocular Examination Stop/go — Endpoint: Toxicity Stage 2: BelaMaf* + bortezomib + dexamethasone, N=60 - Eye symptom questionnaire (VRAT) X Ocular Examination Endpoints: Primary: Safety Secondary: Response rate (>=VGPR), PFS, OS Dosing Schedule: Cycles 1-6 | Cycle 7+; Belamaf Q8W [then] Belamaf Q12W; Weekly Bortezomib (x4) + Dexamethasone (x8); Observation and response assessment only Reduced intensity schedule: - Belamaf Q8 for 6 months then Q12 - Bortezomib weekly for 6 months BelaMaf: Belantamab Mafodotin; VRAT: vision-related anamnestic tool International Myeloma Society Predictive Value of VRAT UKMRA UK Myeloma Research Alliance 83.3% Sensitivity — 5 / 6 true ocular events flagged 75.7% Specificity — 56 / 74 true negatives cleared 98.2% Negative Predictive Value — 56 / 57 VRAT-negatives confirmed 21.7% Positive Predictive Value — 5 / 23 VRAT-positives confirmed Total of 80 paired VRAT and ocular assessments, only 1 false negative VRAT: vision-related anamnestic tool International Myeloma Society Conclusions UKMRA UK Myeloma Research Alliance - The VRAT demonstrated a high negative predictive value (98.2%) for detecting significant ocular adverse events with BVd - This may be an effective method of detecting significant keratopathy and visual acuity changes without the need for ocular examination - A lower positive predictive value suggests a conservative approach - There may be dose holds in the absence of significant keratopathy - The VRAT may be subjective to patient/ HCP interpretation - Training is required of the questionnaire to ensure accuracy and reproducibility - Confirmatory data will be provided by the ongoing Stage 2 - Assessment of VRAT safety in the absence of ocular examinations - Reduced frequency BVd schedule was well tolerated - Belamaf Q8W followed by Q12W maintenance with weekly bortezomib was associated with few dose modifications and interruptions HCP: Health Care Professional

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION Rakesh Popat presents interim Stage 1 results from Arm D of the UKMRA ProMMise trial, evaluating a vision-related anamnestic tool (VRAT) to guide belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) dosing without routine ocular examinations in patients with RRMM https://t.co/bRNa3g1NJs

ProMMise

780 impressions · View post on X →

ProMMise: Study Schema (UKMRA - UK Myeloma Research Alliance) Relapsed myeloma, 1-3 prior lines of therapy -> Stage 1: BelaMaf* + bortezomib + dexamethasone, N=40 - Eye symptom questionnaire (VRAT): check - Ocular Examination: check Stop/go, Endpoint: Toxicity Stage 2: BelaMaf* + bortezomib + dexamethasone, N=60 - Eye symptom questionnaire (VRAT): check - Ocular Examination: X (not performed) Endpoints: Primary: Safety Secondary: Response rate (≥VGPR), PFS, OS Dosing Schedule diagram: Cycles 1-6 | Cycle 7+ Belamaf: Q8W (cycles 1-6) then Q12W (cycle 7+, 4 years post C1D1) Weekly Bortezomib (x4) + Dexamethasone (x8) during cycles 1-6; Observation and response assessment only in cycle 7+ Reduced intensity schedule: - Belamaf Q8 for 6 months then Q12 - Bortezomib weekly for 6 months BelaMaf: Belantamab Mafodotin; VRAT: vision-related anamnestic tool Adverse events Table (left): Adverse event | Any grade n (%) | Grade 3-4 n (%) Eye disorders*: 30 (75.0%) | 13 (32.5%) Fatigue: 16 (40.0%) | 0 (0.0%) Constipation: 13 (32.5%) | 0 (0.0%) Diarrhoea: 13 (32.5%) | 2 (5.0%) Insomnia: 11 (27.5%) | 1 (2.5%) Pain: 11 (27.5%) | 0 (0.0%) Platelet count decreased: 10 (25.0%) | 8 (20.0%) Cough: 9 (22.5%) | 0 (0.0%) Nausea: 8 (20.0%) | 0 (0.0%) Table (right): Adverse event | Any grade n (%) | Grade 3-4 n (%) Alanine aminotransferase increased: 7 (17.5%) | 2 (5.0%) Infections and infestations: 7 (17.5%) | 0 (0.0%) Peripheral neuropathy: 6 (15.0%) | 1 (2.5%) Oedema limbs: 6 (15.0%) | 0 (0.0%) Urinary tract infection: 5 (12.5%) | 1 (2.5%) Dyspnoea: 5 (12.5%) | 0 (0.0%) Lung infection: 2 (5.0%) | 1 (2.5%) Neutrophil count decreased: 2 (5.0%) | 1 (2.5%) Other: 33 (82.5%) | 12 (30.0%) *Includes cataract, blurred vision, dry eye, and related terms Predictive Value of VRAT 83.3% - Sensitivity - 5/6 true ocular events flagged 75.7% - Specificity - 56/74 true negatives cleared 98.2% - Negative Predictive Value - 56/57 VRAT-negatives confirmed 21.7% - Positive Predictive Value - 5/23 VRAT-positives confirmed Total of 80 paired VRAT and ocular assessments, only 1 false negative VRAT: vision-related anamnestic tool Treatment Compliance: Belantamab Mafodotin Dose reductions: Cycles per participant with modification Mean (SD): 0.1 (0.27) Median (IQR): 0.0 (0.0, 0.0) Range: 0 - 1 N: 40 Reason for dose modification: Toxicity 1 (33.3%), Other 2 (66.7%), Total 3 (100.0%) 3 (8%) patients required dose reduction Dose interruptions: Cycles per participant with modification Mean (SD): 0.6 (1.24) Median (IQR): 0.0 (0.0, 1.0) Range: 0 - 7 N: 40 Reason for dose modification: Toxicity 19 (79.2%), Other 5 (20.8%), Total 24 (100.0%) 14 (35%) patients had a dose interruption Low rates of dose reductions and interruptions with Q8W followed by Q12W Belamaf dosing

UKMRA RADAR

3 slides

#mmsm #IMS26 oral data on UKMRA RADAR trial of Isa-VRD and QoL Slide speaks volume about the issue with such data which is very limited with way lower number of patients completing surveys : for example at 1 year 2 out of 3 patients didn’t complete responses Really hard to make any conclusions based on the very high % of lack of data

UKMRA RADAR

133 impressions · View post on X →

QoL Completion - 68/70 participants consented to QoL data collection - Data is immature for 12 and 24 months as follow-up is ongoing (Complete case set analysis; Descriptive analysis) Table, columns: Baseline | End of Induction | 100 days Post-ASCT | 6 Months | 12 Months | 24 Months | Total Questionnaire completed? Yes: 64 (94.1%) | 54 (79.4%) | 44 (64.7%) | 36 (52.9%) | 25 (36.8%) | 1 (1.5%) | 224 (54.9%) No: 4 (5.9%) | 14 (20.6%) | 24 (35.3%) | 32 (47.1%) | 43 (63.2%) | 67 (98.5%) | 184 (45.1%) Total: 68 (100%) | 68 (100%) | 68 (100%) | 68 (100%) | 68 (100%) | 68 (100%) | 408 (100%) Reason not completed: Reason Unknown: 2 (50.0%) | 7 (50.0%) | 14 (58.3%) | 24 (75.0%) | 26 (60.5%) | 0 (0.0%) | 73 (39.7%) Timepoint not yet reached: 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 8 (18.6%) | 56 (83.6%) | 64 (34.8%) Participant Death: 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (12.5%) | 4 (12.5%) | 6 (14.0%) | 7 (10.4%) | 20 (10.9%) Participant Withdrawal: 0 (0.0%) | 1 (7.1%) | 1 (4.2%) | 3 (9.4%) | 3 (7.0%) | 4 (6.0%) | 12 (6.5%) Either not completed or misplaced by site: 1 (25.0%) | 1 (7.1%) | 3 (12.5%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 5 (2.7%) Admin error: 0 (0.0%) | 3 (21.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (1.6%) Lost in post: 0 (0.0%) | 2 (14.3%) | 1 (4.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (1.6%) Other: 1 (25.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (3.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (1.1%) Participant refused: 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (4.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (0.5%) Site missed in error: 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (4.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (0.5%) Total: 4 (100%) | 14 (100%) | 24 (100%) | 32 (100%) | 43 (100%) | 67 (100%) | 184 (100%) (Note: percentages for "Timepoint not yet reached" 24-month value shown on slide as 56 (63.6%) though row total math suggests possible slide rounding; transcribed exactly as displayed: 56 (63.6%).)

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION Karthik Ramasamy presents QoL findings from the UKMRA RADAR trial evaluating IsaVRDc induction and IsaVRd consolidation in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed ultra-high-risk MM (N = 70). QoL generally improved over time, with improvements in global health status and reductions in disease-related symptoms. At 6 months post-ASCT, improvement in global health status met the threshold for a minimal clinically important difference. Future-perspective concerns persisted over time, which may reflect ongoing uncertainty associated with living with MM. Follow our live feed for more updates: https://t.co/OZWuHVlO9d Intended for HCPs. This congress coverage is independently supported through funding from pharmaceutical companies. A full list of our funders can be found on our website. Funders are allowed no influence. #MultipleMyeloma #myeloma #mmsm #MedEd #MedicalCongress @UniofOxford

UKMRA RADAR

288 impressions · View post on X →

CAMMA 1DREAMM-9MajesTEC-3UKMRA RADAR

Abstract Sessions begin at 11:00 AM. Join us in Hall 5 for Abstract Session 3 or Lomond Auditorium for Abstract Session 4. #IMS26 https://t.co/HPzirIbOLS

23rd Annual MEETING & EXPOSITION - International Myeloma Society THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2026 | 11:00-12:00 Abstract Session 3 Co-chairs: Meral Beksac and Martin Kortum - Double hit ultra-high risk myeloma treated with Isa-VRD plus cyclophosphamide induction and Isa-VRD consolidation: QoL analysis of the UKMRA RADAR trial in newly diagnosed transplant eligible patients - Karthik Ramasamy - Updated safety and efficacy of ramantamig (Ram; JNJ-5322) at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), demonstrating feasibility of outpatient dosing (OPD) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) - Jeffrey Matous - DREAMM-9 Patient-Reported Vision-Related Function with Extended Belantamab Mafodotin Dosing Intervals with Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, Dexamethasone (BVRd) in Transplant Ineligible Multiple Myeloma - Hang Quach - A fixed-duration, modified cevostamab dosing regimen induces durable remissions that continue after completion in BCMA-naive pts with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): CAMMA 1 Arm A results - Amrita Krishnan - Overall Survival, Progression and Non-Relapse Mortality With Teclistamab Plus Daratumumab (Tec-Dara) vs Dara-Based Triplets in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): MajesTEC-3 Post Hoc Analysis - Luciano Costa Panelist photos shown: Dr. Beksac, Dr. Kortum, Dr. Matous, Dr. Ramasamy, Dr. Costa, Dr. Krishnan, Dr. Quach 23rd Annual MEETING & EXPOSITION - International Myeloma Society THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2026 | 11:00-12:00 Abstract Session 4 Co-chairs: Lugui Qiu and Niels van de Donk - Augmenting TRAIL-dependent apoptosis enables BCMA CAR-T cells to overcome resistance in multiple myeloma - Mansour Poorebrahim - First-in-human phase Ia/Ib study of QLS32015 (GPRC5DxCD3) in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): updated safety and efficacy data - Jian Cui - An AI-Designed BCMA/FcRL5 Targeting TriTE Overcomes Antigen Escape and Outperforms BCMA-Directed Therapy in Multiple Myeloma - Jessica Encinas Mayoral - A CD4-Dominant, T-Helper-Skewed T Cell State Underlies Movement and Neurocognitive Toxicity After BCMA-Directed CAR-T Therapy in Multiple Myeloma - Theresia Akhlaghi - Single-cell antigen:TCR mapping reveals tumor-specific effector T-cell responses in multiple myeloma - David Avigan Panelist photos shown: Dr. Akhlaghi, Dr. Avigan, Dr. Cui, Dr. Encinas Mayoral, Dr. Poorebrahim, Dr. Qiu, Dr. van de Donk

EMagine/CARTITUDE-6

2 slides Full trial profile →

#IMS2026 the million usd question: do we need ASCT? @Myeloma_Society Aurore Perrot gave a great summary on current past & ongoing RCTs https://t.co/ava8wp4Ksi

A new comparator: T-cell redirection Then: Mel 200 + ASCT vs the same drug classes (PI ± IMiD) → Now: Mel 200 + ASCT vs a new mechanism (T-cell engagement) Trial | Replaces ASCT with | Control arm | N | Status EMagine / CARTITUDE-6 (EMN28 · NCT05257083) | Dara-VRd → cilta-cel (BCMA CAR-T) | Dara-VRd → ASCT | ~750 | Enrolment complete ELLEN (IFM 2025-01 · NCT06918002) | D-VRd × 4 → elranatamab + len × 6 (BCMA × CD3; no ASCT) | D-VRd × 4 → ASCT → D-VRd × 2 | 824 | Recruiting TRIlogy-6 (EMN41 · MMY3003) | Ramantamig + Dara, ≤ 48 months (BCMA × GPRC5D × CD3) | DVRd → ASCT → DVRd × 2 → DR | ~1,000 | Not yet open DURGA-6 (NCT07735637) | AZD0120 (BCMA/CD19 dual CAR-T) | ASCT after 4-6 cycles of induction; both then lenalidomide | 750 | Opening 2026 iMMagine-6 (KT-US-715-0795) | anti-CD38VRd → anito-cel (BCMA CAR-T) | Induction → ASCT → maintenance | — | Not yet open Primary read-outs pending: no first-line randomized data yet for any of these strategies. International Myeloma Society — 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 5 Who might still need an alkylator? Profile | Why an alkylator might still matter | Evidence today t(11;14) | Overexpresses cyclin D1. BCL2 dependence -> cells more "primed" for apoptosis -> hypothesis: more sensitive to pro-apoptotic stress including melphalan | Hypothesis? MIDAS small numbers t(11;14): n=32 Arm A, n=46 Arm B Very high risk (biallelic TP53, ≥ 2 CGS criteria, PCL) | Proliferative disease: cytotoxic pressure may complement T-cell engagement | Tandem ASCT case by case, no robust data Extramedullary disease, high tumor burden | Rapid debulking alongside cell therapy (bridging, CRS risk) | Hypothesis? Antigen escape (BCMA loss) | Argues first for dual targeting (BCMA × GPRC5D, BCMA/CD19) rather than an alkylator | Being tested in the multi-target trials T-cell fitness, marrow microenvironment | Exhausted or immune-cold marrow: T-cell engagement may not suffice; Mel may modify the niche | Hypothesis: biomarker to test? The new trials need prespecified biology-based subgroups and translational cohorts: MRD kinetics, T-cell fitness, target expression International Myeloma Society — 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 7

Now, CAR-T cells and bispecific antibodies are entering head-to-head trials against transplant-based strategies in newly diagnosed myeloma. The destination is not yet known, but the journey could redefine the standard of care. Exciting times at #IMS2026 in Glasgow! @TheIACH @COMyCongress

ELLEN

2 slides

#IMS2026 the million usd question: do we need ASCT? @Myeloma_Society Aurore Perrot gave a great summary on current past & ongoing RCTs https://t.co/ava8wp4Ksi

A new comparator: T-cell redirection Then: Mel 200 + ASCT vs the same drug classes (PI ± IMiD) → Now: Mel 200 + ASCT vs a new mechanism (T-cell engagement) Trial | Replaces ASCT with | Control arm | N | Status EMagine / CARTITUDE-6 (EMN28 · NCT05257083) | Dara-VRd → cilta-cel (BCMA CAR-T) | Dara-VRd → ASCT | ~750 | Enrolment complete ELLEN (IFM 2025-01 · NCT06918002) | D-VRd × 4 → elranatamab + len × 6 (BCMA × CD3; no ASCT) | D-VRd × 4 → ASCT → D-VRd × 2 | 824 | Recruiting TRIlogy-6 (EMN41 · MMY3003) | Ramantamig + Dara, ≤ 48 months (BCMA × GPRC5D × CD3) | DVRd → ASCT → DVRd × 2 → DR | ~1,000 | Not yet open DURGA-6 (NCT07735637) | AZD0120 (BCMA/CD19 dual CAR-T) | ASCT after 4-6 cycles of induction; both then lenalidomide | 750 | Opening 2026 iMMagine-6 (KT-US-715-0795) | anti-CD38VRd → anito-cel (BCMA CAR-T) | Induction → ASCT → maintenance | — | Not yet open Primary read-outs pending: no first-line randomized data yet for any of these strategies. International Myeloma Society — 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 5 Who might still need an alkylator? Profile | Why an alkylator might still matter | Evidence today t(11;14) | Overexpresses cyclin D1. BCL2 dependence -> cells more "primed" for apoptosis -> hypothesis: more sensitive to pro-apoptotic stress including melphalan | Hypothesis? MIDAS small numbers t(11;14): n=32 Arm A, n=46 Arm B Very high risk (biallelic TP53, ≥ 2 CGS criteria, PCL) | Proliferative disease: cytotoxic pressure may complement T-cell engagement | Tandem ASCT case by case, no robust data Extramedullary disease, high tumor burden | Rapid debulking alongside cell therapy (bridging, CRS risk) | Hypothesis? Antigen escape (BCMA loss) | Argues first for dual targeting (BCMA × GPRC5D, BCMA/CD19) rather than an alkylator | Being tested in the multi-target trials T-cell fitness, marrow microenvironment | Exhausted or immune-cold marrow: T-cell engagement may not suffice; Mel may modify the niche | Hypothesis: biomarker to test? The new trials need prespecified biology-based subgroups and translational cohorts: MRD kinetics, T-cell fitness, target expression International Myeloma Society — 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 7

Now, CAR-T cells and bispecific antibodies are entering head-to-head trials against transplant-based strategies in newly diagnosed myeloma. The destination is not yet known, but the journey could redefine the standard of care. Exciting times at #IMS2026 in Glasgow! @TheIACH @COMyCongress

TRIlogy-6

2 slides

#IMS2026 the million usd question: do we need ASCT? @Myeloma_Society Aurore Perrot gave a great summary on current past & ongoing RCTs https://t.co/ava8wp4Ksi

A new comparator: T-cell redirection Then: Mel 200 + ASCT vs the same drug classes (PI ± IMiD) → Now: Mel 200 + ASCT vs a new mechanism (T-cell engagement) Trial | Replaces ASCT with | Control arm | N | Status EMagine / CARTITUDE-6 (EMN28 · NCT05257083) | Dara-VRd → cilta-cel (BCMA CAR-T) | Dara-VRd → ASCT | ~750 | Enrolment complete ELLEN (IFM 2025-01 · NCT06918002) | D-VRd × 4 → elranatamab + len × 6 (BCMA × CD3; no ASCT) | D-VRd × 4 → ASCT → D-VRd × 2 | 824 | Recruiting TRIlogy-6 (EMN41 · MMY3003) | Ramantamig + Dara, ≤ 48 months (BCMA × GPRC5D × CD3) | DVRd → ASCT → DVRd × 2 → DR | ~1,000 | Not yet open DURGA-6 (NCT07735637) | AZD0120 (BCMA/CD19 dual CAR-T) | ASCT after 4-6 cycles of induction; both then lenalidomide | 750 | Opening 2026 iMMagine-6 (KT-US-715-0795) | anti-CD38VRd → anito-cel (BCMA CAR-T) | Induction → ASCT → maintenance | — | Not yet open Primary read-outs pending: no first-line randomized data yet for any of these strategies. International Myeloma Society — 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 5 Who might still need an alkylator? Profile | Why an alkylator might still matter | Evidence today t(11;14) | Overexpresses cyclin D1. BCL2 dependence -> cells more "primed" for apoptosis -> hypothesis: more sensitive to pro-apoptotic stress including melphalan | Hypothesis? MIDAS small numbers t(11;14): n=32 Arm A, n=46 Arm B Very high risk (biallelic TP53, ≥ 2 CGS criteria, PCL) | Proliferative disease: cytotoxic pressure may complement T-cell engagement | Tandem ASCT case by case, no robust data Extramedullary disease, high tumor burden | Rapid debulking alongside cell therapy (bridging, CRS risk) | Hypothesis? Antigen escape (BCMA loss) | Argues first for dual targeting (BCMA × GPRC5D, BCMA/CD19) rather than an alkylator | Being tested in the multi-target trials T-cell fitness, marrow microenvironment | Exhausted or immune-cold marrow: T-cell engagement may not suffice; Mel may modify the niche | Hypothesis: biomarker to test? The new trials need prespecified biology-based subgroups and translational cohorts: MRD kinetics, T-cell fitness, target expression International Myeloma Society — 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 7

Now, CAR-T cells and bispecific antibodies are entering head-to-head trials against transplant-based strategies in newly diagnosed myeloma. The destination is not yet known, but the journey could redefine the standard of care. Exciting times at #IMS2026 in Glasgow! @TheIACH @COMyCongress

DURGA-6

2 slides

#IMS2026 the million usd question: do we need ASCT? @Myeloma_Society Aurore Perrot gave a great summary on current past & ongoing RCTs https://t.co/ava8wp4Ksi

A new comparator: T-cell redirection Then: Mel 200 + ASCT vs the same drug classes (PI ± IMiD) → Now: Mel 200 + ASCT vs a new mechanism (T-cell engagement) Trial | Replaces ASCT with | Control arm | N | Status EMagine / CARTITUDE-6 (EMN28 · NCT05257083) | Dara-VRd → cilta-cel (BCMA CAR-T) | Dara-VRd → ASCT | ~750 | Enrolment complete ELLEN (IFM 2025-01 · NCT06918002) | D-VRd × 4 → elranatamab + len × 6 (BCMA × CD3; no ASCT) | D-VRd × 4 → ASCT → D-VRd × 2 | 824 | Recruiting TRIlogy-6 (EMN41 · MMY3003) | Ramantamig + Dara, ≤ 48 months (BCMA × GPRC5D × CD3) | DVRd → ASCT → DVRd × 2 → DR | ~1,000 | Not yet open DURGA-6 (NCT07735637) | AZD0120 (BCMA/CD19 dual CAR-T) | ASCT after 4-6 cycles of induction; both then lenalidomide | 750 | Opening 2026 iMMagine-6 (KT-US-715-0795) | anti-CD38VRd → anito-cel (BCMA CAR-T) | Induction → ASCT → maintenance | — | Not yet open Primary read-outs pending: no first-line randomized data yet for any of these strategies. International Myeloma Society — 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 5 Who might still need an alkylator? Profile | Why an alkylator might still matter | Evidence today t(11;14) | Overexpresses cyclin D1. BCL2 dependence -> cells more "primed" for apoptosis -> hypothesis: more sensitive to pro-apoptotic stress including melphalan | Hypothesis? MIDAS small numbers t(11;14): n=32 Arm A, n=46 Arm B Very high risk (biallelic TP53, ≥ 2 CGS criteria, PCL) | Proliferative disease: cytotoxic pressure may complement T-cell engagement | Tandem ASCT case by case, no robust data Extramedullary disease, high tumor burden | Rapid debulking alongside cell therapy (bridging, CRS risk) | Hypothesis? Antigen escape (BCMA loss) | Argues first for dual targeting (BCMA × GPRC5D, BCMA/CD19) rather than an alkylator | Being tested in the multi-target trials T-cell fitness, marrow microenvironment | Exhausted or immune-cold marrow: T-cell engagement may not suffice; Mel may modify the niche | Hypothesis: biomarker to test? The new trials need prespecified biology-based subgroups and translational cohorts: MRD kinetics, T-cell fitness, target expression International Myeloma Society — 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 7

Now, CAR-T cells and bispecific antibodies are entering head-to-head trials against transplant-based strategies in newly diagnosed myeloma. The destination is not yet known, but the journey could redefine the standard of care. Exciting times at #IMS2026 in Glasgow! @TheIACH @COMyCongress

iMMagine-6

2 slides

#IMS2026 the million usd question: do we need ASCT? @Myeloma_Society Aurore Perrot gave a great summary on current past & ongoing RCTs https://t.co/ava8wp4Ksi

A new comparator: T-cell redirection Then: Mel 200 + ASCT vs the same drug classes (PI ± IMiD) → Now: Mel 200 + ASCT vs a new mechanism (T-cell engagement) Trial | Replaces ASCT with | Control arm | N | Status EMagine / CARTITUDE-6 (EMN28 · NCT05257083) | Dara-VRd → cilta-cel (BCMA CAR-T) | Dara-VRd → ASCT | ~750 | Enrolment complete ELLEN (IFM 2025-01 · NCT06918002) | D-VRd × 4 → elranatamab + len × 6 (BCMA × CD3; no ASCT) | D-VRd × 4 → ASCT → D-VRd × 2 | 824 | Recruiting TRIlogy-6 (EMN41 · MMY3003) | Ramantamig + Dara, ≤ 48 months (BCMA × GPRC5D × CD3) | DVRd → ASCT → DVRd × 2 → DR | ~1,000 | Not yet open DURGA-6 (NCT07735637) | AZD0120 (BCMA/CD19 dual CAR-T) | ASCT after 4-6 cycles of induction; both then lenalidomide | 750 | Opening 2026 iMMagine-6 (KT-US-715-0795) | anti-CD38VRd → anito-cel (BCMA CAR-T) | Induction → ASCT → maintenance | — | Not yet open Primary read-outs pending: no first-line randomized data yet for any of these strategies. International Myeloma Society — 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 5 Who might still need an alkylator? Profile | Why an alkylator might still matter | Evidence today t(11;14) | Overexpresses cyclin D1. BCL2 dependence -> cells more "primed" for apoptosis -> hypothesis: more sensitive to pro-apoptotic stress including melphalan | Hypothesis? MIDAS small numbers t(11;14): n=32 Arm A, n=46 Arm B Very high risk (biallelic TP53, ≥ 2 CGS criteria, PCL) | Proliferative disease: cytotoxic pressure may complement T-cell engagement | Tandem ASCT case by case, no robust data Extramedullary disease, high tumor burden | Rapid debulking alongside cell therapy (bridging, CRS risk) | Hypothesis? Antigen escape (BCMA loss) | Argues first for dual targeting (BCMA × GPRC5D, BCMA/CD19) rather than an alkylator | Being tested in the multi-target trials T-cell fitness, marrow microenvironment | Exhausted or immune-cold marrow: T-cell engagement may not suffice; Mel may modify the niche | Hypothesis: biomarker to test? The new trials need prespecified biology-based subgroups and translational cohorts: MRD kinetics, T-cell fitness, target expression International Myeloma Society — 23rd International Myeloma Society Annual Meeting — 7

Now, CAR-T cells and bispecific antibodies are entering head-to-head trials against transplant-based strategies in newly diagnosed myeloma. The destination is not yet known, but the journey could redefine the standard of care. Exciting times at #IMS2026 in Glasgow! @TheIACH @COMyCongress

MonumenTAL-6

2 slides Full trial profile →

CARTITUDE-4CERVINODREAMM-7DREAMM-8MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MonumenTAL-3MonumenTAL-6

Never a good time to be a myeloma patient but this is the best it has ever been! Remarkable results in early relapse setting! @mvmateos #IMS26 https://t.co/rNUviKkXc5

MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MELT-MMMonumenTAL-3MonumenTAL-6SUCCESSOR-2

#IMS2026 How to approach first relapse by @DrRakeshPopat https://t.co/3uXrSIgjY7

IMMAGINE-1

2 slides Full trial profile →

#IMS2026 how to approach at first relapse by @DrKrinaPatel https://t.co/2v1m6XsspR

CARTITUDE-4IMMAGINE-1

238 impressions · View post on X →

FIRST RELAPSE Why CAR T belongs earlier Maximize early kill, then return time to the patient 48% MRD-negative by day 56 62% vs 18% overall MRD negativity at 10⁻⁵ Deepest early cytoreduction ENGINEERED IMMUNE RESET Lymphodepletion reduces suppressive immune cells; one infusion delivers a large, activated population that expands in vivo. A fundamentally different biologic attack than continuous antibody exposure +11.6 point QoL advantage at month 12 Global health status: +10.1 with cilta-cel vs −1.5 with SOC Treatment-free runway, less ongoing supportive care, and a PFS2/OS advantage SURVIVORSHIP IS PART OF THE STRATEGY Track immune reconstitution, IVIG and infection needs, revaccination, late effects and return to life. CARTITUDE-4; Mina et al, Lancet Haematol 2025; Popat et al, Blood 2024; updated OS analysis, Lancet 2026 Emerging CAR T platforms show deep early responses Latest publicly reported datasets; populations and follow-up differ Dataset | Anito-cel iMMagine-1 | Arlo-cel early-line phase 1 | AZD0120 DURGA-1 | KLN-1010 inMMyCAR Platform / target | Ex vivo BCMA | Ex vivo GPRC5D | Ex vivo BCMA + CD19 | In vivo BCMA Patients | 117 evaluable | 24 evaluable, 31 treated | 23 evaluable | 18 dosed Prior lines | Median 5 | Median 2, 1-3 allowed | Median 4 | Not reported Follow-up | Median 12.6 mo | Median 18.3 mo | Median 3.9 mo | 6 pts ≥4 mo, first pt >10 mo ORR | 97% | 96% | 96% | 100% all evaluable CR / sCR | 68% | 67% | 78.3% | 4 sCR / 6 pts with ≥4 mo MRD negative at 10⁻⁵ | 93% (70/75 evaluable) | 56.3% MRD-negative CR | 94% (16/17 evaluable) | 100% all evaluable 12-month PFS | 79% | 74% | Not reported | Not reported Deep responses now extend from ex vivo platforms to first-in-human in vivo CAR T Patel K, ASH 2025 #256. Bal S, Haematologica 2026. Richard S, Blood 2025 #269. Ho J, ASCO 2026. Cross-trial comparisons are descriptive. MRD denominators and follow-up maturity differ. Take-home messages • CAR T belongs at first relapse for eligible patients, before disease biology and treatment burden narrow the opportunity. • Earlier-line cilta-cel delivers deep real-world responses, with 79% progression-free survival at 12 months. • Earlier referral preserves more active holding-therapy options and helps protect T-cell fitness before collection. • Sequence intentionally: use holding therapy while access is secured, collect early, then bridge to control disease before infusion. • The platform is expanding beyond conventional BCMA CAR T to GPRC5D, dual-target, and in vivo approaches. Refer early, collect early, and preserve the path to CAR T

Priyanka Nair-Gupta, PhD, speaks about investigational D-domain BCMA CAR-T anito-cel. Early efficacy and safety of anito-cel in pivotal ph2 iMMagine-1 trial supports further exploration of anito-cel in ph2/3 trails in RRMM, NDMM. #IMS26 https://t.co/MlnnOtD6b4

IMMAGINE-1

252 impressions · View post on X →

IZALCO

2 slides

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | POSTER Marcelo Capra, Centro Integrado de Hematologia e Oncologia, presented updated efficacy and safety results from the phase II IZALCO trial, evaluating Isa SC+ Kd delivered SC by manual injection vs on-body injection (OBI) in patients with RRMM who had received 1–3 prior LOT (N = 74). At a median follow-up of 21.9 months, median PFS was NR; PFS at 18 months was 61.5% (95% CI, 48.7–72.0). Median OS was NR; OS at 18 months was 80.8% (95% CI, 69.8–88.2). Patient satisfaction with Isa SC OBI remained consistently high through C25D15 following patient selection of their preferred injection method at C7D1. Follow our live feed for more updates: https://t.co/OZWuHVlO9d Intended for HCPs. This congress coverage is independently supported through funding from pharmaceutical companies. A full list of our funders can be found on our website. Funders are allowed no influence. #MultipleMyeloma #myeloma #mmsm #MedEd #MedicalCongress

IZALCO

FIGURE 1. Study design Isatuximab SC + Kd: 28-day cycles (Parts 1 & 2) - Isatuximab SC: 1400 mg weekly in C1, then biweekly - Carfilzomib: 20 mg/m2 D1-2, then 56 mg/m2 D8-9, D15-16 in C1, then 56 mg/m2 D1-2, D8-9, D15-16 of further cycles - Dexamethasone: 20 mg D1-2, D8-9, D15-16, D22-23 Part 1: N=8 - Manual administration ~8 mins at C1D1 and afterwards ~6 mins - Manual administration ~6 mins from C1D1 on Part 2: N=66, Randomization 1:3 - n=24: OBI C1-C3 -> Manual C4-C6 - n=42: Manual C1-C3 -> OBI C4-C6 OBI or Manual per patient choice at C7+ C, cycle; D, day; Kd, carfilzomib + dexamethasone; OBI, on-body injector; SC, subcutaneous. FIGURE 2. Progression-free survivala Kaplan-Meier curve, Y axis "Progression-free survival probability" (0-1.0), X axis "Time (Months)" (0-26) Legend: Isa SC + Kd, + Censored Median PFS: NR (95% CI: 16.2-NR) PFS at 18 months: 61.5% (95% CI: 48.7-72.0) Patients at risk (Isa SC + Kd): 74, 68, 62, 56, 54, 51, 47, 44, 40, 31, 20, 9, 2, 0 aThe median follow up duration was 21.9 months. CI, confidence interval; Kd, carfilzomib + dexamethasone; NR, not reached; PFS, progression free survival; SC, subcutaneous. FIGURE 3. Patient experience and satisfaction Line chart, Y axis "Patients satisfied with injection method (%)" (0-100), X axis "Cycle" (C1D8 through C25D15) Legend: Isa SC Manual, Isa SC OBI - both lines generally 80-100% with some dips (e.g. one point drops to ~50% labeled "Very small sample size") Isa SC Manual - Total number of patients who completed the questionnaire (by cycle): 48 41 42 46 40 43 39 29 26 27 24 9 5 7 6 6 8 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 6 5 4 4 2 2 2 Isa SC OBI - Total number of patients who completed the questionnaire (by cycle): 23 23 24 24 20 23 22 35 32 35 31 33 27 48 40 48 44 40 38 37 37 40 31 35 34 30 33 29 22 18 17 15 14 9 C, cycle; D, day; OBI, on-body injector; SC, subcutaneous. Key Conclusions - Updated results of the IZALCO study continue to show the efficacy and safety of Isa SC delivered either by manual injection or OBI, plus Kd. - Patient satisfaction with Isa SC OBI remained consistently high after patient choice of injection method at C7D1. - These safety and efficacy findings are consistent with those reported in the Phase 3 IKEMA study (Isa IV plus Kd).5 - Overall, these results support the efficacy, safety and feasibility of Isa delivered subcutaneously via OBI in patients with RRMM.

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | POSTER Marcelo Capra, Centro Integrado de Hematologia e Oncologia, presented updated efficacy and safety results from the phase II IZALCO trial, evaluating Isa SC+ Kd delivered SC by manual injection vs on-body injection (OBI) in patients with RRMM who had received 1–3 prior LOT (N = 74). At a median follow-up of 21.9 months, median PFS was NR; PFS at 18 months was 61.5% (95% CI, 48.7–72.0). Median OS was NR; OS at 18 months was 80.8% (95% CI, 69.8–88.2). Patient satisfaction with Isa SC OBI remained consistently high through C25D15 following patient selection of their preferred injection method at C7D1. Follow our live feed for more updates: https://t.co/OZWuHVlO9d Intended for HCPs. This congress coverage is independently supported through funding from pharmaceutical companies. A full list of our funders can be found on our website. Funders are allowed no influence.

IZALCO

29 impressions · View post on X →

FIGURE 1. Study design Isatuximab SC + Kd: 28-day cycles (Parts 1 & 2) - Isatuximab SC: 1400 mg weekly in C1, then biweekly - Carfilzomib: 20 mg/m2 D1-2, then 56 mg/m2 D8-9, D15-16 in C1, then 56 mg/m2 D1-2, D8-9, D15-16 of further cycles - Dexamethasone: 20 mg D1-2, D8-9, D15-16, D22-23 N=8 (Part 1): Manual administration ~8 mins at C1D1 and afterwards ~6 mins Manual administration ~6 mins from C1D1 on N=66 (Part 2), Randomization 1:3: n=24 -> OBI C1-C3 -> Manual C4-C6 n=42 -> Manual C1-C3 -> OBI C4-C6 OBI or Manual per patient choice at C7+ C, cycle; D, day; Kd, carfilzomib + dexamethasone; OBI, on-body injector; SC, subcutaneous. FIGURE 2. Progression-free survival(a) Kaplan-Meier curve, Isa SC + Kd (purple line), Censored (+ marks) Y-axis: Progression-free survival probability 0-1.0 X-axis: Time (Months) 0-26 Median PFS: NR (95% CI: 16.2-NR) PFS at 18 months: 61.5% (95% CI: 48.7-72.0) Number at risk row (Isa SC + Kd): 74 68 62 56 54 51 47 44 40 31 20 9 2 0 (at months 0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26) (a)The median follow up duration was 21.9 months. CI, confidence interval; carfilzomib + dexamethasone; NR, not reached; PFS, progression-free survival; SC, subcutaneous. FIGURE 3. Patient experience and satisfaction Line chart: Patients satisfied with injection method (%), Y-axis 0-100%, X-axis Cycle 1-25(D15) Two lines: Isa SC Manual and Isa SC OBI, both fluctuating mostly in 80-100% range across cycles Annotation arrow pointing to a dip around cycle 20 area: "Very small sample size" Below chart, two rows showing "Total number of patients who completed the questionnaire" per cycle for Isa SC Manual and Isa SC OBI, values decreasing over cycles (starting around 48-49 at cycle 1, declining to single digits by cycle 25) C, cycle; D, day; OBI, on-body injector; SC, subcutaneous. Key Conclusions - Updated results of the IZALCO study continue to show the efficacy and safety of Isa SC delivered either by manual injection or OBI, plus Kd. - Patient satisfaction with Isa SC OBI remained consistently high after patient choice of injection method at C7D1. - These safety and efficacy findings are consistent with those reported in the Phase 3 IKEMA study (Isa IV plus Kd).5 - Overall, these results support the efficacy, safety and feasibility of Isa delivered subcutaneously via OBI in patients with RRMM.

RedirecTT-1

2 slides Full trial profile →

CARTITUDE-4ImmunoPRISMMajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MonumenTAL-3RedirecTT-1

#IMS26 #mmsm Infections with BsAn and CAR-T therapies https://t.co/nGIR6yJM9B

[Slide 1 - Incidence and severity of infections across different approved BsAbs and CAR T trials, cross-trial compilation table] BsAbs late-line relapse (triple-class exposed) - trial/drug/All grade/Grade 3-4/Grade 5: MajesTEC-1/Teclistamab: 78.8% / 55.2% / 12.7%. MagnetisMM-3/Elranatamab: 69.9% / 39.8% / 6.5%. LinkerMM-1/Linvoseltamab: 75% / 48% / NR. MonumenTAL-1/Talquetamab: 66.2% / 14.5% / 1.4%. RedirecTT-1/Tec-Tal: 89% / 64% / 12%. BsAbs early-line relapse (1-3 prior lines): MajesTEC-9/Teclistamab: 82.8% / 41.6% / 5.5%. MajesTEC-3/Tec-Dara: 96.5% / 41.6% / 5.5%. MonumenTAL-3/Tal-Dara: 83.0% / 29.2% / 1.5%. MonumenTAL-3/Tal-Dara-Pom: 84.3% / 37.7% / 0.7%. CAR T late-line relapse: CARTITUDE-1/Cilta-Cel: All grade 58%, Gr3-4 20%, Gr5 NR. KarMMa/Ide-Cel: 69%, 22%, NR (#, deaths from AEs not otherwise specified 7% total). CAR T early-line relapse: CARTITUDE-4/Cilta-Cel: 59%, 24%, 4%. KarMMa-3/Ide-Cel: 56%, 22%, NR (*, death from AEs 6% total). "Infections remain a major safety concern with T-cell-redirecting therapies, particularly with continuous bispecific antibody treatment." Table provided for ease of viewing, no comparisons intended. Sources: Moreau P et al NEJM 2022; Lesokhin AM et al Nat Med 2023;29(9):2259-2267; Lee HC et al Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2026 Feb, 26(2):e201-e212,e8; Chari A et al NEJM 2022; Cohen Y et al Engl J Med 2025;392:138-49; Touzeau C et al N Engl J Med 2026;395:440-53; Costa LJ et al N Eng J Med 2026;394:739-52; Mina R et al N Engl J Med 2026;395:671-83; Einsele H et al, Lancet Oncol 2026;27:254-68; Ailawadhi S et al, Blood 2024 (144)23; Berdeja J et al, Lancet 2021;398:314-24; Munshi NC et al, N Engl J Med 2021 Feb 25;384(8):705-716. [Slide 2 - Pillars of infection prevention in patients receiving T-cell redirecting therapies] Table: Immune defect/risk -> Type of infection -> Preventive strategy. Lymphopenia/Neutropenia -> Bacterial infections/PJP, approx first 3-6 months -> Antiviral + PJP prophylaxis, G-CSF support. Immunosuppressive therapy (steroids, IL-6 blockage, cyclophosphamide) -> Bacterial infections/Sepsis/fungal infections/CMV -> Consider antibacterial/antifungal. B-cell aplasia/Hypogammaglobulinemia -> Bacterial/Viral (Respiratory virus, VZV/HSV)/CMV -> Immunoglobulin replacement, Vaccination. T-cell dysfunction -> Other opportunistic infections, Viral infections, fungal (in selected high risk patients) -> Fixed treatment duration/Schedule optimization. Sources: Rodriguez-Otero P et al, Lancet Oncology May 2024; O'Neill C, et al. eJHaem. 2023;4:811-822; Friedrich MJ, et al. Cancer Cell. 2023;41:711-725.e6; Frerichs KA et al, Blood Advances 2024; Mohan M et al, Blood Cancer Journal (2025) 15:74; Tix T et al, Molecular Therapy (2025)33:7; Richardson T et al, Blood Advances (2025) 9:6; Nath K et al, Blood Cancer Journal (2024) 14:88; Reynolds G et al, Blood advances (2023) 7:19; Banerjee R et al, Blood Advances (2025) 9:18; Dr Rodriguez Otero personal opinion.

CR109234 trial: Updated data from IMS 2026 2026 in 4L+ R/R MM: BsAbs landscape, adapted from Dr. Al-Ola Abdallah (@Abdallah81MD) 👉 https://t.co/yQ2JMo3LSK Updated landscape 👉 https://t.co/maj64kPE3X Learn more about CR109234 👉 https://t.co/E8JQPlwNdm #LARVOL #IMS2026 https://t.co/U0Uvv6IQJx

Sep 22

RedirecTT-1

1.4K impressions · View post on X →

Updated CR109234 Data in 4L+ R/R MM: BsAbs - IMS 2026 Trials: CR109234, P1 (N=180), Janssen (Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson) | RedirecTT-1, P1/2 (N=228), Janssen (Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson) Status: CR109234: Recruiting | RedirecTT-1: Active, not recruiting Patient Population: CR109234: Triple-class, 51.8% penta-drug | RedirecTT-1: Triple-class, 65% penta-drug PFS: CR109234: 96.3% @12 mo (RP2D); 84.6% @18 mo (TCR Naïve); 81.9% @24 mo (TCR-naive pts in part 1) RedirecTT-1: 70% @18 mo ORR (Naive Patients): CR109234: 93.60% | RedirecTT-1: 80% (All patients) CR/sCR (Naive): CR109234: 76.60% | RedirecTT-1: 52% Grade ≥3 Infections: CR109234: 25% | RedirecTT-1: 64% CRS (Any Grade): CR109234: 39.30% | RedirecTT-1: 79% (2% Grade 3) ICANS: CR109234: Not reported | RedirecTT-1: 3% Hypogammaglobulinemia: CR109234: 52.80% | RedirecTT-1: 57% (non-IgG) Fatal Infections: CR109234: 2 patients | RedirecTT-1: 12% of patients Follow-up: CR109234: 19.4 mo (naive group); 23.5 mo (Part 1) | RedirecTT-1: 20.3 mo Adapted from a post by Dr. Al-Ola A. Abdallah, MD, originally published on X on August 9, 2025. LARVOL

DREAMM-8

2 slides Full trial profile →

CARTITUDE-4CERVINODREAMM-7DREAMM-8MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MonumenTAL-3MonumenTAL-6

Never a good time to be a myeloma patient but this is the best it has ever been! Remarkable results in early relapse setting! @mvmateos #IMS26 https://t.co/rNUviKkXc5

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION Meletios Dimopoulos, Department of Clinical Therapeutics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, presented long-term results of the randomized phase III DREAMM-8 trial evaluating BPd (n = 155) vs PVd (n = 147) in patients with RRMM who https://t.co/gHdSupwzD4

DREAMM-8

741 impressions · View post on X →

DREAMM-9

2 slides

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | PRESENTATION Hang Quach presents patient-reported VRF outcomes from the phase I DREAMM-9 study evaluating different belamaf dosing schedules with BVRd in transplant-ineligible NDMM. ORR was 90%, 96%, and 85% in the Q3/4W (n = 40), Q6/8W (n = 24), and pooled https://t.co/3UBMB9k8vX

DREAMM-9

60 impressions · View post on X →

CAMMA 1DREAMM-9MajesTEC-3UKMRA RADAR

Abstract Sessions begin at 11:00 AM. Join us in Hall 5 for Abstract Session 3 or Lomond Auditorium for Abstract Session 4. #IMS26 https://t.co/HPzirIbOLS

23rd Annual MEETING & EXPOSITION - International Myeloma Society THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2026 | 11:00-12:00 Abstract Session 3 Co-chairs: Meral Beksac and Martin Kortum - Double hit ultra-high risk myeloma treated with Isa-VRD plus cyclophosphamide induction and Isa-VRD consolidation: QoL analysis of the UKMRA RADAR trial in newly diagnosed transplant eligible patients - Karthik Ramasamy - Updated safety and efficacy of ramantamig (Ram; JNJ-5322) at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), demonstrating feasibility of outpatient dosing (OPD) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) - Jeffrey Matous - DREAMM-9 Patient-Reported Vision-Related Function with Extended Belantamab Mafodotin Dosing Intervals with Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, Dexamethasone (BVRd) in Transplant Ineligible Multiple Myeloma - Hang Quach - A fixed-duration, modified cevostamab dosing regimen induces durable remissions that continue after completion in BCMA-naive pts with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): CAMMA 1 Arm A results - Amrita Krishnan - Overall Survival, Progression and Non-Relapse Mortality With Teclistamab Plus Daratumumab (Tec-Dara) vs Dara-Based Triplets in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): MajesTEC-3 Post Hoc Analysis - Luciano Costa Panelist photos shown: Dr. Beksac, Dr. Kortum, Dr. Matous, Dr. Ramasamy, Dr. Costa, Dr. Krishnan, Dr. Quach 23rd Annual MEETING & EXPOSITION - International Myeloma Society THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2026 | 11:00-12:00 Abstract Session 4 Co-chairs: Lugui Qiu and Niels van de Donk - Augmenting TRAIL-dependent apoptosis enables BCMA CAR-T cells to overcome resistance in multiple myeloma - Mansour Poorebrahim - First-in-human phase Ia/Ib study of QLS32015 (GPRC5DxCD3) in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): updated safety and efficacy data - Jian Cui - An AI-Designed BCMA/FcRL5 Targeting TriTE Overcomes Antigen Escape and Outperforms BCMA-Directed Therapy in Multiple Myeloma - Jessica Encinas Mayoral - A CD4-Dominant, T-Helper-Skewed T Cell State Underlies Movement and Neurocognitive Toxicity After BCMA-Directed CAR-T Therapy in Multiple Myeloma - Theresia Akhlaghi - Single-cell antigen:TCR mapping reveals tumor-specific effector T-cell responses in multiple myeloma - David Avigan Panelist photos shown: Dr. Akhlaghi, Dr. Avigan, Dr. Cui, Dr. Encinas Mayoral, Dr. Poorebrahim, Dr. Qiu, Dr. van de Donk

IMROZ

2 slides Full trial profile →

Arthur Bobin@A_Bobin_

Happy to share the data from our comparative analysis of IMROZ and ISASOCUT at #IMS26 in Glasgow https://t.co/mTyJ0CByJI

IMROZ

129 impressions · View post on X →

Photo of a person standing in front of poster PA-104 (partially occluding it), with poster PA-105 partially visible to the right. PA-104 title: "Comparative Analysis of Isa SC VRd (ISASOCUT, Once-Weekly Bortezomib) and Isa IV VRd (IMROZ, Twice-Weekly Bortezomib): 20-Month Follow-Up in Transplant-Ineligible Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients" Authors (partial): Arthur Bobin, Mohamad Mohty, Philippe Moreau, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Meletios Athanasios Dimopoulos, Robert Z. Orlowski, Cyrille Touzeau, Aurore Perrot, Thomas Chalopin, Mamoun Dib, Lydia Montes, Lionel Karlin, Umer Khan, Julien Bonnet, Rick Zhang, Ercem Kodas, Florence Suzan, Thierry Facon, Xavier Leleu Legible bullet points (partially visible under poster header): isatuximab (Isa) plus bortezomib (V), lenalidomide/dexamethasone (d) is approved for transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma based on the phase 3 IMROZ trial; subcutaneous (SC) Isa delivered via the novel on-body injector (OBI) has been previously tested in other therapies; a study (ISASOCUT) demonstrated Isa SC delivered via the OBI; major differences between the IMROZ and ISASOCUT protocols; Isa delivered once weekly (QW) for 12 months from cycle 2 in ISASOCUT vs twice weekly (BIW) for 6 months in IMROZ; both switch to monthly administration of Isa (12 months in ISASOCUT, 18 months in IMROZ); peripheral neuropathy (PN), a key dose-limiting toxicity, dose reduction/discontinuation; an updated comparative analysis on the safety and efficacy of Isa SC (ISASOCUT; QW V) vs Isa IV (IMROZ; BIW V) at 20 months of follow-up. FIGURE 3 "Efficacy in the Isa SC OBI (QW V) and Isa IV (BIW V) cohorts" - bar chart comparing Isa SC OBI + VRd vs Isa IV + VRd across categories including >=VGPR, MRD-, and sustained MRD- (>=12 months); approximate percentage labels visible (roughly 80-90% range for >=VGPR, 30-50% range for MRD- categories) but exact values not confidently legible due to image resolution/blur. FIGURE 4 "Progression-free survival in Isa SC OBI (QW V) and Isa IV (BIW V) cohorts" - Kaplan-Meier curve with a small inset table showing "PFS per investigator at 24 months" comparing the two cohorts (percentages not legibly readable). Safety summary bullets (partially legible): Grade >=3 non-hematologic TEAEs occurred at a lower rate with Isa SC OBI (62.2%, QW V) than with Isa IV (73.8%, BIW V) (Table 2); the incidence of serious TEAEs was similar with Isa SC OBI (51.4%, QW V) and Isa IV (52.5%, BIW V); infusion-related reactions (IRRs) were less common in Isa SC OBI (5.4%, QW V) patients vs Isa IV (22.4%, BIW V); a lower incidence of grade >=2 peripheral neuropathy was observed with Isa SC OBI (29.7%, QW V) compared with Isa IV (40.7%, BIW V), but the incidence of grade >=3 peripheral neuropathy was similar; Isa SC OBI (21.6%, QW V) patients exhibited a lower incidence of peripheral neuropathy leading to V dose reduction vs Isa IV (33.5%, BIW V) patients, and a lower incidence of peripheral neuropathy leading to V discontinuation (Isa SC OBI: 5.4%; Isa IV: 9.5%). TABLE 2 "Safety summary" - comparing Isa SC OBI x VRd (N=74) vs Isa IV x VRd (N=265), row labels visible including "Treatment emergent adverse events, TEAEs", "Any TEAE", "Grade >=3 TEAEs", "Serious TEAEs", "Fatal (Grade 5) TEAEs during the treatment period", "Any TEAE leading to definitive discontinuation of all treatments", "Any TEAE leading to peripheral neuropathy", "Any TEAE leading to bortezomib dose reduction" - the numeric values in the table cells are too small/blurry to read confidently. Key Conclusions (partially legible): This comparative analysis at 20 months of follow-up found greater tolerability with Isa SC OBI plus VRd (QW V) compared with Isa IV plus VRd (BIW V) in patients with TI-NDMM; there was a lower incidence of peripheral neuropathy (including events leading to V dose reduction and discontinuation) and infusion-related reactions. Neighboring poster PA-105 (partially visible, different study): Authors "Gulibadanmu Aizezi, Jianli Xu, Gang Chen, Chun xia Han..." - Department of Hematology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical [University, cut off]. Legible text fragments: INTRODUCTION - "Multiple myeloma (MM) is a malignant hematologic tumor characterized by clonal abnormal proliferation of bone marrow plasma cells, accounting for 10%-15% of all hematologic malignancies. Standard first-line therapies-including proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulators, and novel CAR-T cell therapies-have significantly improved treatment efficacy; however, MM remains incurable. Enhancing remission rates and improving patient PFS and OS remain critical clinical challenges. Compared to traditional chemotherapy and newer drug regimens, patients receiving autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) exhibit superior PFS and OS outcomes." AIM (partially cut off): "To evaluate the imp[act of] cell transplantation [on] outcomes by compar[ing] characteristics and [...] eligible multiple my[eloma] who underwent ASC[T] did not during the [...] thereby informing [...] decision-making." RESULTS: "All 73 ASCT recipients achieved successful engraftment without transplant-related mortality. After a median follow-up of 37.3 months, ASCT was associated with significantly prolonged PFS compared with non-ASCT treatment (72.6 vs 43.9 months, P<0.041), while OS showed a numerical but non-significant improvement (89.7% vs 54.8%, P=0.637). In high-risk patients, ASCT improved PFS (76.7 vs 53.1 months) and yielded higher OS rates (93.3% vs 48.9%), although differences were not statistically significant. A separate subgroup analysis demonstrated significantly longer PFS with ASCT [...]" IMS 2026 conference banner also visible: "23rd Annual Meeting & Exposition, September 23-26, 2026, Glasgow, Scotland."

NCT04751877 trial: Updated data from IMS 2026 (@Myeloma_Society) in 1L MM: anti-CD38 mAbs landscape, adapted from Dr. Akhil Santhosh (@tuttsakhil) 👉 https://t.co/V8wOYggpnM Updated landscape 👉 https://t.co/fUETXB1mH1 Learn more about NCT04751877: https://t.co/YYmevH13Fd #LARVOL #IMS2026 #InternationalMyelomaSociety #Myeloma #MMSM #HematologicOncology #Hematology #BloodCancers #CancerResearch #CancerData #Oncology #OncologyInsights #ClinicalTrials | @mtmdphd | @szusmani | @RahulBanerjeeMD | | @End_myeloma | @VincentRK

CEPHEUSIMROZPERSEUS

277 impressions · View post on X →

Updated NCT04751877 Data in 1L MM: anti-CD38 mAbs - IMS 2026 Trials: Perseus (EMN) | IMROZ (sanofi) | NCT04751877 (CHU Poitiers) | CEPHEUS (Janssen, Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson) Treatment Regimen: Perseus: Daratumumab + Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone vs Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone IMROZ: Isatuximab + Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone vs Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone NCT04751877: Isatuximab + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone +/- Bortezomib vs Isatuximab + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone CEPHEUS: Isatuximab + Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone vs Bortezomib + Lenalidomide + Dexamethasone Median Follow-Up: Perseus: 47.5 months | IMROZ: 59.7 months | NCT04751877: 48.9 months | CEPHEUS: 76.0 months PFS: Perseus: 48 mo: 84.3% vs 67.7% IMROZ: 60 mo: 63.2% vs 45.2% NCT04751877: 18 mo: 87.2% vs 85.5%; 24 mo: 85.2% vs 80%; 36 mo: 78% vs 72.3%; 48 mo: 74% vs 65.7% CEPHEUS: 54 mo: 68.1% vs 49.5%; 72 mo: 59.3% vs 38.3% ORR%: Perseus: 96.6% vs 93.8% | IMROZ: 91.3% vs 92.3% | NCT04751877: 85% vs 78% | CEPHEUS: 97% vs 93% MRD negativity rate: Perseus: 75.2% vs 47.5% | IMROZ: 58.1% vs 43.6% | NCT04751877: 12 mo: 51% vs 21% | CEPHEUS: 61.1% vs 40% ≥CR rate: Perseus: 87.9% vs 70.1% | IMROZ: 74.7% vs 64.1% | NCT04751877: 58% vs 31% | CEPHEUS: 80.6% vs 61.4% Adapted from Dr. Akhil Santhosh (X 2025) LARVOL

SPARK

2 slides

Natalia Neparidze@NataliaNeparid1

Congratulations to Dr Parker on her poster presentation at International Myeloma Society Meeting in Glasgow!@Terri_ParkerMD @Yale @YaleHematology https://t.co/7gCTtQE7aB

SPARK

55 impressions · View post on X →

[Main poster, PA-507] International Myeloma Society - 23rd Annual MEETING & EXPOSITION - September 23-26, 2026 . Glasgow, Scotland Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Primary Plasma Cell Leukemia: A Single-Center Case Series Rahul Pottabathini 1, Noffar Bar 2, Elan Gorshein 2, Tara Anderson 2, Erica Stevens 2, Sabrina L. Browning 2, Natalia Neparidze 2, and Terri L. Parker 2 1 UConn - Waterbury Internal Medicine Residency Program, Waterbury, Connecticut, USA 2 Division of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT PA-507 INTRODUCTION - Primary plasma cell leukemia (pPCL) is an aggressive plasma cell neoplasm associated with poor outcomes. pPCL patients are excluded from randomized trials, and optimal treatment sequencing remains unclear[1]. - Proteasome inhibitor - immunomodulatory drug (PI-IMiD) combinations with anti-CD38 antibodies and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) may improve outcomes [2]. - We report a retrospective review of pPCL patients treated with daratumumab-based quadruplet (DQ), ASCT, during induction and maintenance of pPCL. METHODS - We conducted a retrospective study of 13 patients diagnosed with pPCL per IMWG criteria at our institution from 2014 to 2026. - Baseline demographics, laboratory data, cytogenetics, Revised International Staging System (R-ISS), treatment regimens, best response per IMWG response criteria, ASCT status, and survival outcomes were studied. - High risk cytogenetics defined as presence of any one of the abnormality: del(17p)/TP53 mutation; t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14,20)-with 1q+/del(1p32). - The data cutoff for analysis was July 2026. RESULTS - The median age at diagnosis was 64 years (IQR: 57-82), 8 (62%) were female, and 11 (85%) were non-Hispanic. High-risk cytogenetics were seen in 11 (85%) patients. The median LDH was 335.0 U/L (IQR: 103-2033) and median beta-2 microglobulin was 11.0 mg/L (IQR: 2-41). R-ISS staging was III in 72%. ECOG PS status of 0-1 in 62% patients, and 2 in 31%. Eight patients (62%) underwent ASCT. - A cytotoxic regimen (CyBorD/VTD-PACE) was used initially if patients exhibited acute organ failure at presentation, followed by daratumumab-based combinations (Dara-KRd or Dara-VRd). - Among 13 patients, 11 (85%) received DQ therapy during their treatment course. 4 (31%) patients received one cycle of cytotoxic chemotherapy followed by transition to DQ as frontline therapy, 3 (23%) patients received upfront DQ, and 4 (31%) received as maintenance following ASCT. - The overall response rate was 82% of patients (n=9). Of responders, 2 (18.2%) had a complete response, 6 (54.5%) had VGPR, and 1 (9.1%) had PR. Four patients (31%) had relapsed disease, of whom one received talquetamab as a bridge to CAR-T cell therapy. - At a median follow-up of 15 months (IQR: 4-42), the median observed PFS was 8 months (IQR: 3-42), and the median OS was not reached. 4 (31%) patients had early progression and succumbed to the disease. Figure 1: Response Rates following DQ Induction - Overall Response (N=11): CR 18.2%, VGPR 54.5%, PR 9.1% Table 1. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics (Data Cutoff: 7/1/26, N=13) Age, years median (range): 64.0 (57-82) Sex, n (%): Male 5 (38), Female 8 (62) Race, n (%): White 10 (77), Black 2 (15) Ethnicity, n (%): Non-Hispanic 11 (85), Hispanic 2 (15) Median circulating plasma cells, n (range): 30.0 (7-85) Extramedullary disease present, n (%): Yes 6 (46), No 7 (54) Median LDH (U/L), (range): 335.0 (103-2033) Median Beta-2 microglobulin (mg/L), (range): 11.0 (2-41) R-ISS staging, n (%): Stage II 1 (8), Stage III 10 (77), Unknown 2 (15) Cytogenetics, n (%): High risk 11 (85), Standard risk 1 (7), Unknown 1 (7) ECOG performance status, n (%): 0-1 8 (62), 2 4 (31), 3 1 (8) ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group CONCLUSIONS - In this retrospective review of pPCL, DQ regimens were universally incorporated into therapy. ASCT was performed in the majority of patients. - Our study adds to the growing body of real-world evidence supporting anti-CD38-based strategies with ASCT consolidation in pPCL. REFERENCES 1. Katodritou E, Terpos E, Delimpasi S, et al. Real-world data on prognosis and outcome of primary plasma cell leukemia in the era of novel agents: a multicenter national study by the Greek Myeloma Study Group. Blood Cancer J. 2018;8(3):31. 2. Katodritou E, Kastritis E, Dalampira D, et al. Improved survival of patients with primary plasma cell leukemia with VRd or daratumumab-based quadruplets: a multicenter study by the Greek Myeloma Study Group. Am J Hematol. 2023;98(5):730-738. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Noffar Bar has research funding from Johnson & Johnson; Sabrina L. Browning has research funding from Johnson & Johnson; Natalia Neparidze has research funding from Johnson & Johnson, GSK, and consults for Cel[illegible]. The remainder of the authors have no conflicts to disclose. CONTACT INFORMATION Terri Parker, M.D., Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA, terri.parker@yale.edu Footer: PA-507 - Plasma Cell Precursor and Other Disorders - Rahul Pottabathini - International Myeloma Society - PosterSessionOnline [Adjacent poster, left, partially visible] [Ou]tcomes in Smoldering Multiple Myeloma - [Up]dated Results From the SPARK Study Body text mostly too small/angled to read: SPARK is a real-world, retrospective chart review study involving hematology centers across Europe ... 408 patients were included from 27 sites across 5 countries (Italy, Spain, and France mentioned) ... median follow-up was 59.5 months ... risk classification per AQUILA study criteria, Mayo 20-2-20, and IMWG 2020 ... [illegible]

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | POSTER Francesca Gay, University of Torino, presented updated results from the retrospective SPARK study evaluating real-world outcomes in patients with SMM (N = 408) across European hematology centers. Regardless of how high-risk SMM was defined, >57% of https://t.co/HY0wzo4dAN

SPARK

499 impressions · View post on X →

Methods - SPARK is a real-world, retrospective chart review study involving hematology centers across Europe (Figure 1) - Eligible patients were adults (>=18 years) diagnosed with SMM - Data were collected from all patients who were diagnosed with SMM between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2021, with follow-up from the date of diagnosis until December 31, 2023, death, or loss to follow-up, whichever came first - For patients who withdrew consent, all data entered into the electronic case report form up until withdrawal were considered for analysis - High-risk SMM definitions per AQUILA study criteria, Mayo 20-2-20, and IMWG scoring system have been presented previously for SPARK5 - Here, we present updated results with extended follow-up, including all available data collected up to the cut-off date of March 2026 Figure 6: Patients with high-risk SMM who progressed to MM Bar chart, Y axis "Patients, %" (0-100), grouped by risk classification, bars = CRAB (red) vs SLiM only (black): AQUILA HR (n=80): CRAB 57.5%, SLiM only 16.3% Mayo 20-2-20 HR (n=50): CRAB 62.0%, SLiM only 14.0% IMWG 2020 HR (n=25): CRAB 60.0%, SLiM only 24.0% Any-model HR (n=72): CRAB 62.5%, SLiM only 12.5% aIncluded patients with CRAB only and patients with both CRAB and SLiM. Table 3: Incidence of organ damage in patients who progressed to MM Columns: AQUILA (HR n=194, Non-HR n=25, UC n=189), Mayo 20-2-20 (HR n=86, Non-HR n=216, UC n=106), IMWG 2020 (HR n=43, Non-HR n=217, UC n=148), Any model (HR n=173, Non-HR n=168, UC n=67), Total N=408 Progressed to MM, n: AQUILA 80/3/62; Mayo 50/55/40; IMWG 25/55/65; Any model 72/45/27; Total 145 Progressed to MM and had organ damage at the time of MM, n (%): AQUILA: HR 52(65.0), Non-HR 1(33.3), UC 33(53.2) Mayo 20-2-20: HR 32(64.0), Non-HR 32(58.2), UC 22(55.0) IMWG 2020: HR 14(56.0), Non-HR 35(63.6), UC 36(56.9) Any model: HR 46(63.9), Non-HR 27(60.0), UC 13(46.4) Total: 86(59.3) Type of organ damage, %: Bone pain - AQUILA: 38.5/100/24.2; Mayo: 28.1/37.5/36.4; IMWG: 35.7/37.1/29.7; Any model: 32.6/37.0/30.8; Total: 33.7 Bone fracture - AQUILA: 25.0/0/27.3; Mayo: 25.0/27.3/27.3; IMWG: 21.4/22.9/29.7; Any model: 21.7/22.2/46.2; Total: 25.6 Renal failure - AQUILA: 5.8/0/6.1; Mayo: 6.3/3.1/9.1; IMWG: 0/2.9/10.8; Any model: 8.7/0/7.7; Total: 5.8 Hypercalcemia - AQUILA: 5.8/0/3.0; Mayo: 3.1/0/13.6; IMWG: 0/0/10.8; Any model: 4.3/0/15.4; Total: 4.7 Anemia - AQUILA: 36.5/0/51.5; Mayo: 40.6/37.5/50.0; IMWG: 50.0/37.1/43.2; Any model: 43.5/53.8/41.9; Total: 41.9 Other - AQUILA: 28.8/0/21.2; Mayo: 21.9/25.0/27.3; IMWG: 21.4/25.7/22.0; Any model: 23.9/33.3/15.4; Total: 25.6 Key Takeaway The findings from this large, real-world study of European patients with SMM reinforce the need for enhanced monitoring strategies and improved risk stratification to identify patients with high-risk SMM that could benefit from early treatment intervention Conclusions - Regardless of how high-risk SMM was defined, >57% of progressions to MM were CRAB events, and >56% of progressions to MM included organ damage, most commonly bone pain, bone fractures, and anemia - Patients with high-risk SMM were monitored more frequently than non-high-risk patients, yet the incidence of organ damage at MM diagnosis remained high - These data suggest that active monitoring alone is insufficient in preventing organ damage in the majority of patients with high-risk SMM; highlighting the unmet need for early treatment intervention

IRAKLIA

1 slide Full trial profile →

CONGRESS | #IMS26 | POSTER Fredrik Schjesvold, Oslo University Hospital, presented PRO results from the phase III IRAKLIA trial, evaluating isatuximab delivered SC via an on-body injector (OBI) vs intravenously (IV) with Pd in patients with RRMM who had received ≥1 prior LOT. https://t.co/rSjJLadAMQ

IRAKLIA

189 impressions · View post on X →

ABCL635

1 slide

AbCellera@AbCelleraBio

Attend our talk at IMS 2026 to see top-line Phase 2 results on ABCL635, an investigational, potential best-in-class antibody drug for the non-hormonal treatment of vasomotor symptoms. Read more about ABCL635 here: https://t.co/5SI7ieI7gN #IMSRio2026 #IMS2026 https://t.co/0GB6lTYZep

ABCL635

9.3K impressions · View post on X →

SeaLAND

1 slide

#IMS26 #mmsm SeaLAND trial :Selinexor plus lenalidomide versus lenalidomide Adding selinexor gave no PFS or OS benefit, including in high risk patients, and it added substantial toxicity that reduced how much lenalidomide patients actually received ➡️142 patients enrolled (R = https://t.co/hXfKrww4KW

Samer Al Hadidi, MD,MS,FACP (@HadidiSamer) — #IMS26 — Figure 2: Progression-free survival, BJHaem

SeaLAND

804 impressions · View post on X →

[Slide 1 - CONSORT diagram, SeaLAND trial (Selinexor-Lenalidomide vs Lenalidomide maintenance in NDMM), BJHaem] Randomised part: assessed n=175, excluded 41 (inclusion)/8 (declined), randomized n=126. Safety run-in: assessed n=20, excluded 3 (ineligible)/1 (no ASCT), n=16. Allocated to lenalidomide maintenance n=64; allocated to selinexor+lenalidomide maintenance n=78 (62 randomized + 16 safety run-in). Reasons for discontinuation - Lenalidomide arm (n=64): study closure 45, disease progression 13, withdrawal of consent 1, investigator decision 2, adverse event 2, other 1. Sel+Len arm (n=78): study closure 39, disease progression 14, withdrawal of consent 13, investigator decision 6, adverse event 3, intercurrent illness 1, non-compliance 1, other 1. [Slide 2 - Figure 2: Progression-free survival, BJHaem] Panel A - KM curves: Len alone vs Sel+Len as maintenance post-ASCT. Number at risk at months 0/6/12/18/24/30/36/42/48: Len 64/57/44/35/26/19/9/2/0; Sel+Len 78/64/54/43/29/21/13/9/5. Panel B - subgroup forest plot (HR, 95% CI), Sel+Len vs Len alone: Overall 21/78 (26.9%) vs 14/64 (21.9%), HR 1.22 (0.62-2.41). Age <65: 12/52 (23.1%) vs 10/40 (25.0%), HR 0.84 (0.36-1.95). Age >=65: 9/26 (34.6%) vs 4/24 (16.7%), HR 2.33 (0.71-7.68). R-ISS Stage I: 4/24 (16.7%) vs 4/24 (16.7%), HR 1.16 (0.29-4.64). Stage II: 6/33 (18.2%) vs 10/37 (27.0%), HR 0.77 (0.28-2.11). Risk Low: 18/62 (29.0%) vs 9/49 (18.4%), HR 1.67 (0.75-3.71). High: 3/16 (18.8%) vs 5/15 (33.3%), HR 0.47 (0.11-2.01). del17p None: 19/65 (29.2%) vs 13/58 (22.4%), HR 1.22 (0.60-2.46). del17p present: 2/13 (15.4%) vs 1/6 (16.7%), HR 1.07 (0.10-11.89).

SUCCESSOR-2

1 slide Full trial profile →

MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MELT-MMMonumenTAL-3MonumenTAL-6SUCCESSOR-2

#IMS2026 How to approach first relapse by @DrRakeshPopat https://t.co/3uXrSIgjY7

DREAMM-7

1 slide Full trial profile →

CARTITUDE-4CERVINODREAMM-7DREAMM-8MajesTEC-3MajesTEC-9MonumenTAL-3MonumenTAL-6

Never a good time to be a myeloma patient but this is the best it has ever been! Remarkable results in early relapse setting! @mvmateos #IMS26 https://t.co/rNUviKkXc5

ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group@eaonc

EQUATE (EAA181)

1 slide

#ClinicalTrial EAA181/EQUATE, led by @myelomaMD of @mayoclinic, is testing the use of combination therapy in adult patients with newly diagnosed #MultipleMyeloma. For more information: https://t.co/Ny8oyGFFbQ #MMSM #NDMM https://t.co/ma7bnsRdM3

EQUATE (EAA181)

216 impressions · View post on X →

DART

1 slide

Yi Lin@YiLinMDPhD