Evidence Hub

Real-world efficacy and safety of mezigdomide-dexamethasone in heavily pre-treatred multiple myeloma patients: An Italian case series

D. De Novellis, R. Spadano, R. Della Pepa, L. Pavan, E. Manzato, S. Palmieri, F. Accardi, R. Fontana et al.

Blood, 2025

10 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Introduction Heavily pre-treated multiple myeloma (MM) patients have very poor outcomes and limited survival. Mezigdomide, a novel oral cereblon E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD), has demonstrated promising efficacy and safety in combination with dexamethasone (Mez-D) for relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM), as documented in the phase I–II trial (NCT03374085). Due to its recent approval, especially in Europe, real-world evidence remains limited. In this retrospective, observational, multicenter, real-world Italian case series, we collected clinical data on RRMM patients treated with Mez-D outside clinical trials, to assess efficacy and safety of this novel combination.

Methods A total of 10 RRMM patients treated with Mez-D through expanded access programs (EAP) outside clinical trials were enrolled from August 2024 to July 2025 across seven Italian Hematology Units. High-risk genetic abnormalities and prior treatment exposure/refractoriness were defined according to the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria.

Results The median age was 71 years (range 61–85), and 30% were males. Half of the patients had an ECOG performance status of 0–1, while the remaining ≥2. The M-protein subtype was IgG in 40% of cases, IgA in 30%, light chain only in 20%, and biclonal IgG-IgA in 10% of subjects. Kappa light chain was more frequent (60%) compared to lambda (40%).

High genetic risk was observed in 40% of patients, and 30% met the definition of high-risk based on updated criteria…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 10 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free