# Efficacy and Safety of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Combination Therapies: A Systematic Review Integrating Network Meta-Analysis and Real-World Vigilance Study

## TL;DR

This study compares the effectiveness and safety of different treatments for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, finding that regimens with anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies perform best but come with notable safety risks.

## Contribution

The study integrates network meta-analysis with real-world pharmacovigilance data to provide a comprehensive evaluation of NDMM therapies.

## Key findings

- D_VRd and Isa_VRd regimens showed superior efficacy compared to VRd in progression-free survival and response rates.
- D_VRd was associated with 197 significant adverse drug event signals, including 64 unlabeled ones, primarily affecting elderly males.
- Adverse events for D_VRd exhibited a bimodal time distribution pattern, indicating potential underappreciated safety risks.

## Abstract

Background: Although anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody-based regimens are standard care for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), direct comparative efficacy and comprehensive real-world safety data remain scarce. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Efficacy was assessed using hazard ratios (HRs) for progression-free survival and odds ratios (ORs) for response rates, with treatment rankings evaluated by Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) values. Separately, adverse event reports for daratumumab, bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (D_VRd) regimens were extracted from the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) (Q1 2015–Q2 2025). Statistical analyses were performed using R (4.3.3) and STATA (16.0). Results: The NMA included 33 RCTs. For the primary efficacy endpoints, compared to the standard bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) regimen, both D_VRd (OR = 3.21, 95% CI: 2.46–4.26; HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.38–0.63) and isatuximab plus VRd (Isa_VRd) (OR = 1.71, 95% CI: 1.25–2.32; HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.51–0.85) regimens demonstrated superior efficacy. Subsequent pharmacovigilance analysis of D_VRd identified 11,714 FAERS reports, yielding 197 significant adverse drug event signals (64 unlabeled). These signals primarily affected elderly males and showed a bimodal distribution pattern. Conclusions: Combination regimens containing anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies demonstrate superiority in achieving deep remission and survival benefits, with D_VRd and Isa_VRd regimens showing particularly outstanding performance. However, efficacy and safety profiles vary across different combination regimens. Real-world data analysis further indicates that the D_VRd regimen carries several safety risk signals that remain underappreciated and exhibits a bimodal time distribution pattern. These findings provide new evidence to guide clinical decision-making and risk-stratified monitoring.