BACKGROUND: Bortezomib-based regimens have long represented the standard option for systemic AL amyloidosis, whereas daratumumab has recently emerged as a promising alternative. We compared two consecutive single-center cohorts of frail, non-transplant-eligible patients treated with either bortezomib-based therapy or daratumumab monotherapy, assessing clinical and renal outcomes. METHODS: Thirty-one patients with renal AL amyloidosis were included: 17 received bortezomib-based regimens (historical cohort) and 14 received daratumumab monotherapy (prospective cohort). All had biopsy-confirmed renal amyloid deposition and were transplan-ineligible. Hematologic and organ responses followed International Society of Amyloidosis criteria. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts. Hematologic response rates were 57.1% with bortezomib versus 92.8% with daratumumab (p = 0.03), with complete responses in 28.6% and 57.1%, respectively. Renal response occurred in 35% of bortezomib-treated patients versus 71.4% with daratumumab (p = 0.04). Proteinuria declined by 76% in bortezomib responders and 72% in daratumumab responders, with stable creatinine in both groups. Among patients achieving dual hematologic and renal responses, 12-month survival was 100% in the daratumumab cohort versus 71% in the historical group. At last follow-up, renal survival was 67% versus 86%, and overall survival 47% versus 79% (p = 0.08). Major infections occurred in 18% and 14%, respectively. Repeat biopsies showed stabilization or regression of amyloid in 62% of daratumumab-treated versus 20% of historical cases. CONCLUSIONS: In frail, ASCT-ineligible patients with biopsy-proven renal AL amyloidosis, daratumumab monotherapy yielded higher hematologic and renal response rates compared with bortezomib-based regimens. These findings support early anti-CD38 therapy as a potential strategy to improve renal preservation and survival, warranting confirmation in multicenter trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dario et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: