Treatment strategy
For newly diagnosed patients with AL amyloidosis, accurate risk stratification is crucial for formulating treatment strategies. The primary goal of treatment is to reduce the level of monoclonal immunoglobulin light chains in the body, prevent further deposition of amyloid proteins in vital organs, and alleviate or reverse organ dysfunction caused by amyloid protein deposition. Among initially diagnosed patients with AL amyloidosis, about 20% are suitable for autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT), and some patients, after effective induction therapy in the early stage, can also undergo ASCT later. Multiple clinical studies have shown that among newly diagnosed patients with AL amyloidosis who receive induction therapy based on bortezomib, 84% achieve a hematological response after ASCT treatment (with a very good partial response (VGPR) rate of 33% and a complete response (CR) rate of 39%). After “consolidation” treatment with a bortezomib-based regimen following ASCT, the CR rate can increase to about 60%, and the minimal residual disease (MRD) negative rate is approximately 40%.26 The overall survival rate of patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis who achieved CR after ASCT treatment was over 50% at 15 years.27
Patients who do not meet the ASCT criteria are recommended to receive a bortezomib-based chemotherapy regimen as early as possible, usually in combination with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (CyBorD). Clinical studies have shown that adding daratumumab to CyBorD-based therapy as a combination induction can lead to deeper hematological responses, improved organ function, and better survival outcomes compared to using CyBorD alone. Seventy-eight percent of patients achieve VGPR or better hematological responses, and approximately 50% to 55% of patients show organ responses after 18 months of treatment. Additionally, the combination of daratumumab with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone is beneficial for translocation (11;14) patients.28
For patients with AL amyloidosis who fail to achieve a deep hematological response through first-line chemotherapy, second-line treatment may be necessary. Currently, commonly used second-line treatments include pomalidomide, ixazomib, and bendamustine. However, the proportion of patients achieving a hematological response of VGPR or better with these drugs is not high: 18% to 38% for pomalidomide, 36% to 43% for ixazomib, and 23% for bendamustine.29 Retrospective studies have shown that the combination of daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone is effective as a second-line treatment for AL amyloidosis, and in relapsed patients, the response rate is close to that of Dara-VCD in front-line treatment.30
Teclistamab is a bispecific antibody targeting B cell maturation antigen (BCMA) and T cell CD3 receptor. The overall response rate of phase 1–2 studies in patients with MM was 63%, with 39.4% of patients achieving complete remission or better and 26.7% achieving MRD negativity.31 Recently, it has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of relapsed or refractory MM. Traditionally, the treatment of AL amyloidosis has often referenced MM therapies. People have started to consider the efficacy and safety of teclistamab in AL amyloidosis. A retrospective study showed that 88% of patients with relapsed or refractory AL amyloidosis achieved VGPR with teclistamab, including 41% in CR status, but no cardiac or renal toxicity was recorded.32
While initial treatment with daratumumab-based therapies represents a significant advance in the treatment of AL amyloidosis, nearly half of patients do not achieve CR (47%), and there is no guarantee of organ response.28 Chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy is a novel therapeutic strategy mediated by genetic engineering. Similar to MM, BCMA is highly expressed in amyloid-producing plasma cells and is retained during relapse.33 A phase Ia/b study (NCT04720313) of a novel anti-BCMA chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy developed at Hadassah Medical Center has demonstrated for the first time the safety and efficacy of this strategy in treating advanced, recurrent, or refractory AL amyloidosis patients.34
Due to the involvement of multiple organ systems in AL amyloidosis, despite hematological responses during treatment, progressive organ failure may still occur. In patients with kidney involvement, this can ultimately lead to end-stage renal disease, and isolated kidney damage may also be present. A multicenter retrospective study included 237 patients with AL amyloidosis who received kidney transplants between 1987 and 2020, with a median follow-up of 8.5 years. The median overall survival after kidney transplantation was 8.6 years, and it was found that the median overall survival time for patients with AL amyloidosis was better than that for non-amyloidosis kidney transplant patients.35 Patients whose hematological response reached CR or VGPR had better survival, median graft survival, and lower graft recurrence than those without a hematological response.35,36 However, there is currently no unified standard for determining which AL amyloidosis patients are more suitable for kidney transplantation. Studies suggest that patients who receive chemotherapy before kidney transplantation and achieve a hematological response of CR or VGPR have better outcomes. For AL amyloidosis patients who progress to advanced heart failure, these patients may benefit from heart transplantation.37 Kraus et al.25 reported 115 patients with cardiac amyloidosis who received heart transplants during two different periods (1987–2007 and 2008–2020). The median overall survival in both periods was 6.3 years, with the survival period for patients who received transplants between 2008–2020 (9.7 years) being significantly higher than that for those between 1987–2007 (1.8 years). Therefore, heart transplantation may be the ultimate treatment option for myocardial amyloidosis, but it requires thorough evaluation.
Therefore, the treatment goal for patients with AL amyloidosis is to prevent disease progression, achieve the best hematological response possible, strive for organ function reversal, and prolong survival time. With the continuous development of new drugs and the improvement of treatment standardization, the survival and prognosis of patients with AL amyloidosis have been significantly improved.
Prognosis assessment
In recent years, with advances in diagnostic and treatment techniques, the prognosis of patients with AL amyloidosis has improved, but overall survival remains short. The main determinant of amyloidosis outcomes is the degree of cardiac involvement.24 The Mayo Clinic uses NT-proBNP, BNP, and cardiac troponin not only as markers for the staging of amyloidosis, but also to assess prognosis.38 Therefore, during the diagnosis and treatment process, it is necessary to closely monitor cardiac function indicators and make early judgments on heart involvement. For patients with concurrent heart failure, active supportive therapy should be provided. In addition to myocardial markers, there is a strong correlation between the degree of reduction in FLCs of amyloid protein and improvements in survival rates. Changes in FLC and NT-proBNP can predict survival rates up to three months after the start of treatment.39 However, for patients with renal insufficiency, the accumulation of serum FLC may limit the level of sFLC. Therefore, the FLC κ/λ ratio is used for disease diagnosis, rather than FLC levels alone, and the difference between affected and unaffected FLC is introduced as a parameter for monitoring the disease.40 In addition, bone marrow plasma cells are associated with a poor prognosis in 20% or more of patients with AL amyloidosis.15 A recent retrospective multicenter cohort study has shown that the depth of 24-h proteinuria reduction can inform the risk and survival of kidney replacement therapy and better assess the effectiveness of treatment.41
Another important prognostic factor for AL amyloidosis is the depth of response to treatment. Current evidence suggests that patients with deeper remission have longer recurrence-free and overall survival times. However, there is no consensus on methods for evaluating MRD. Studies using flow cytometry to assess MRD in patients show higher organ remission rates, progression-free survival, and very low hematological relapse in MRD-negative AL amyloidosis patients.42,43 Comparing the MRD-negative and MRD-positive groups, 88% and 64% (P = 0.06) of patients had kidney responses, 75% and 59% (P = 0.45) had heart responses, and 90% and 75% (P = 0.20) had responses in any organ. These data suggest that there may be a correlation between a higher probability of MRD negativity and organ responses after AL amyloidosis treatment.44 A meta-analysis incorporating nine studies involving 451 patients found that in AL amyloidosis, MRD negativity was associated with higher cardiac or renal response rates and indicated better progression-free survival during follow-up; however, the correlation between overall survival and MRD status was not significant.42 Therefore, it is unclear whether the treatment of AL amyloidosis should aim for MRD negativity, or whether patients with MRD positivity require more aggressive chemotherapy regimens or ASCT. Whether MRD can guide the assessment of prognosis and adjustment of further treatment in AL amyloidosis warrants further research.