Myeloma and Leukemia—Challenges and Current Treatment Options: 2nd Edition

Topic Information

Dear Colleagues,

This Topic is the second edition of the collection “Myeloma and Leukemia—Challenges and Current Treatment Options”, available at https://www.mdpi.com/topics/LCACTO.

After years of stagnation in the field, in recent years, we have entered into a new era in multiple myeloma and acute leukemia therapy with the discovery of many novel agents. This was due to better knowledge of the biology of the diseases, and of the pathogenesis-related pathways, with the advent of new combinations of drugs and new therapy development, together with an improved understanding of the immune system, resulting in great progress in the development of immune therapies for the treatment of patients, including monoclonal and bispecific antibodies, and CAR-T cell approaches. The numerous ongoing trials evaluating these new opportunities, also considering real-life experiences, are helping to confirm the efficacy and tolerability of these drugs in daily clinical practice. This Special Issue aims to focus on novel agents and their combinations. Focus will be placed on the efficacy of novel drugs and promising combination approaches to further improve outcomes in the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma and acute leukemia. 

We welcome the submission of original research articles, reviews, interesting case reports, and interim data of clinical trials.

Dr. Giovanni Martinelli
Dr. Claudio Cerchione
Topic Editors

Keywords

Participating Journals

Journal Name	Impact Factor	CiteScore	Launched Year	First Decision (median)	APC
BioMedInformatics biomedinformatics	-	3.4	2021	19.9 Days	CHF 1200	Submit
Cancers cancers	4.4	8.8	2009	19.1 Days	CHF 2900	Submit
Hemato hemato	1.0	2.0	2020	21.8 Days	CHF 1200	Submit
Hematology Reports hematolrep	1.2	1.4	2009	29.4 Days	CHF 1600	Submit

Preprints.org is a multidisciplinary platform offering a preprint service designed to facilitate the early sharing of your research. It supports and empowers your research journey from the very beginning.

MDPI Topics is collaborating with Preprints.org and has established a direct connection between MDPI journals and the platform. Authors are encouraged to take advantage of this opportunity by posting their preprints at Preprints.org prior to publication:

1. Share your research immediately: disseminate your ideas prior to publication and establish priority for your work.
2. Safeguard your intellectual contribution: Protect your ideas with a time-stamped preprint that serves as proof of your research timeline.
3. Boost visibility and impact: Increase the reach and influence of your research by making it accessible to a global audience.
4. Gain early feedback: Receive valuable input and insights from peers before submitting to a journal.
5. Ensure broad indexing: Web of Science (Preprint Citation Index), Google Scholar, Crossref, SHARE, PrePubMed, Scilit and Europe PMC.

Related Topic

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results

Content type Publication Date

Result details

Normal Extended Compact

Journals

All BioMedInformatics Cancers Hemato Hematology Reports

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less

Select all

Export citation of selected articles as:

Plain Text BibTeX BibTeX (without abstracts) Endnote Endnote (without abstracts) Tab-delimited RIS

Error

Oops... you haven't selected anything for export.

Ok

clear

attachment

Supplementary material:
Supplementary File 1 (ZIP, 126 KB)

13 pages, 1139 KB  

Open AccessArticle

Comparative Effectiveness of Pomalidomide-Based Regimens in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Multicenter Real-World Analysis in China

by Shan Gao, Junling Zhuang, Aijun Liu, Dongmei Wang, Wei Wang, Xin Li, Zhihong Wang, Meiyun Fang, Ming Gong, Zhilin Jia, Sun Wu, Zheng Xu, Genjie Wang and Li Bao

Cancers 2026, 18(7), 1160; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18071160 - 3 Apr 2026

Viewed by 564

Abstract

Background: Although multiple pomalidomide-based combinations are active in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), comparative data to guide regimen selection remain limited. Methods: A total of 230 patients with RRMM from 12 centers in China who received pomalidomide-based regimens were included [...] Read more.

Background: Although multiple pomalidomide-based combinations are active in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), comparative data to guide regimen selection remain limited. Methods: A total of 230 patients with RRMM from 12 centers in China who received pomalidomide-based regimens were included in this retrospective analysis. Overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared across regimens incorporating bortezomib or ixazomib (V/IPD), carfilzomib (KPD), or daratumumab (DPD), and multivariable analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors. Results: The overall ORR was 73.9%, with rates of 63%, 79%, and 85% in the V/IPD (n = 66), KPD (n = 69), and DPD (n = 95) cohorts, respectively. ORR differed significantly between V/IPD and DPD (p = 0.0165), driven by a higher proportion of ≥VGPR in the DPD group. The median PFS for the entire cohort was 17.4 months (95% CI: 13.7–20.1), compared with 15.4 months (95% CI: 12.8–20.5), 14.2 months (95% CI: 6.9–not estimable), and 19.2 months (95% CI: 15.1–24.9) for V/IPD, KPD, and DPD, respectively, without significant differences. In multivariable analysis, DPD was associated with improved ORR (HR 4.83, p < 0.001) but not with PFS. R-ISS stage III predicted inferior response (HR 0.35, p = 0.04), whereas ≥3 prior lines of therapy correlated with shorter PFS (HR 1.77, p = 0.012). Adverse events were predominantly hematologic, with limited grade 3–4 toxicity and no treatment-related mortality. Conclusions: This multicenter real-world analysis clarifies the relative positioning of commonly used pomalidomide-based regimens in RRMM and underscores the importance of treatment timing and disease stage in optimizing outcomes. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic Myeloma and Leukemia—Challenges and Current Treatment Options: 2nd Edition)

►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 1577 KB  

Open AccessArticle

Addition of Venetoclax to Azacitidine Did Not Improve Survival in Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Was Not Well Tolerated: Real World Experience

by David Yanni, Nupur Krishnan and Rouslan Kotchetkov

Cancers 2026, 18(5), 841; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18050841 - 5 Mar 2026

Viewed by 737

Abstract

Introduction: Front-line therapy with Azacitidine (AZA) + Venetoclax (Ven) improved overall survival (OS) and remissions in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients ineligible for standard induction. Less is known about the outcome of AML treated with AZA + Ven in the “real world”. [...] Read more.

Introduction: Front-line therapy with Azacitidine (AZA) + Venetoclax (Ven) improved overall survival (OS) and remissions in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients ineligible for standard induction. Less is known about the outcome of AML treated with AZA + Ven in the “real world”. Methods: We assessed the comparative pattern of administration, tolerability, efficacy and safety of AZA vs. AZA + Ven administered at our cancer centre. We retrospectively reviewed all patients treated with AZA alone or AZA + Ven. Patients who received less than one cycle or proceeded with consolidative stem cell transplant were excluded. Results: A total of 53 patients, median age 77 years, received AZA, and 23 patients, median age 73 years, received AZA + Ven. Among those, 69% and 47.8% were ≥75 years old, respectively. Only 52% received Ven doses above 200 mg. Mean time on therapy was 13.1 months in AZA vs. 5.9 months in AZA + Ven. Treatment delays occurred in 22.6% of AZA and 34.8% of AZA + Ven patients, primarily due to infections and cytopenias. Neutropenia grade 3/4 occurred in 28.3% of AZA vs. 56.5% of AZA + Ven patients. Thrombocytopenia grade 3/4 occurred in 15.1% of AZA and 51.2% of AZA + Ven patients. Anemia grade 3/4 occurred in 5.7% of AZA vs. 30.4% of AZA + Ven patients. Moreover, 69.8% of AZA and 69.5% AZA + Ven patients reached stable disease/partial and complete remission. Median overall survival (OS) was similar: 18 months in AZA vs. 14 months in the AZA + Ven group, p = 0.905. Conclusions: In a community setting, the addition of Venetoclax to AZA did not improve overall survival or disease control, mainly due to low tolerability and higher toxicity. However, these results should be interpreted cautiously due to a significant imbalance in the cytogenetic risk profiles and lower tolerability in the combined group. This suggests the need for a larger study with adjusted analyses. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic Myeloma and Leukemia—Challenges and Current Treatment Options: 2nd Edition)

►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

attachment

Supplementary material:
Supplementary File 1 (ZIP, 583 KB)

19 pages, 2050 KB  

Open AccessArticle

Second Salvage Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma in the Era of Novel Agents: Results of the KMM2301 Study

by Jongheon Jung, Ji Hyun Lee, Sung-Hyun Kim, Jae Hoon Lee, Kwai Han Yoo, Young Rok Do, Ho-jin Shin, Kihyun Kim, Sang Eun Yoon, Dok Hyun Yoon, Hyungwoo Cho, Hye Jin Kang, Ja Min Byun, Jae-Cheol Jo, Seung-Shin Lee, Won Sik Lee, Je-Jung Lee, Sung-Hoon Jung, Myung-Won Lee, Jun Ho Yi, Ju-Hyun Park, Chang-Ki Min and Hyeon-Seok Eomadd Show full author list remove Hide full author list

Cancers 2026, 18(3), 471; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18030471 - 30 Jan 2026

Viewed by 906

Abstract

Background: Second salvage autologous stem cell transplantation (SAT) is a therapeutic option for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) who relapse after a first autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in the era of novel agents. However, the clinical context in which SAT provides benefit [...] Read more.

Background: Second salvage autologous stem cell transplantation (SAT) is a therapeutic option for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) who relapse after a first autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in the era of novel agents. However, the clinical context in which SAT provides benefit relative to contemporary salvage regimens remains unclear. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 51 patients who underwent SAT after novel agent-based induction and first ASCT, and salvage re-induction, and compared outcomes with 113 patients treated with salvage carfilzomib–lenalidomide–dexamethasone (KRd) without SAT. Results: Median interval from first ASCT to relapse was 27 months. In the SAT cohort, median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from initiation of salvage therapy were 30 and 99 months, respectively. A time to relapse ≥18 months after first ASCT and receipt of SAT as second-line of therapy were associated with significantly longer PFS and OS. In multivariate analysis, administration of SAT at later lines was independently associated with inferior outcomes, while a time to relapse ≥18 months after first ASCT was associated with significantly longer OS. Compared with the KRd-only cohort, SAT was associated with longer OS, whereas PFS was numerically longer without statistical significance. Among patients who had received both a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory drug as salvage induction, SAT was associated with longer PFS and OS. Conclusions: SAT may provide clinical benefit in selected patients with MM, particularly those with a durable response to first ASCT and those undergoing SAT at an earlier line of relapse in the novel agent era. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic Myeloma and Leukemia—Challenges and Current Treatment Options: 2nd Edition)

►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less

Select all

Export citation of selected articles as:

Plain Text BibTeX BibTeX (without abstracts) Endnote Endnote (without abstracts) Tab-delimited RIS

 

Error

Oops... you haven't selected anything for export.

Ok

clear

Displaying articles 1-3