Abstract
Mass spectrometry (MS) offers a minimally invasive approach for detecting monoclonal proteins in multiple myeloma (MM), but large prospective evaluations remain limited. We analyzed 3,301 serum samples from 617 patients enrolled in the phase III GMMG-HD7 trial to characterize the analytical performance and clinical relevance of MS-based measurable residual activity. MS reliably distinguished therapeutic antibodies, tracked diagnostic M proteins longitudinally, and demonstrated strong prognostic value across defined time points. MS negativity was associated with superior progression-free survival (PFS), with the greatest separation at later time points (12 months of maintenance: hazard ratio, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.15 to 0.43]; adjusted P < .001). Combined assessment with bone-marrow measurable residual disease (MRD) further refined risk stratification: MS/MRD double-positive patients exhibited the worst PFS, whereas all other groups showed comparably favorable outcomes. MS/MRD concordance increased over time and was influenced by immunoglobulin isotype, with expected immunoglobulin G-recycling–associated early discordance. MS provided accurate M-protein detection and outperformed serum protein electrophoresis at low concentrations, reliably quantifying low-level residual disease. These findings establish serum MS as a sensitive, reproducible, and practical biomarker that complements MRD and supports minimally invasive disease monitoring in MM, with potential integration into future response assessment and risk-adapted treatment strategies.
INTRODUCTION
Mass spectrometry (MS) offers many minimally invasive diagnostic tools for multiple myeloma (MM) to detect and track M protein in peripheral blood, categorized generally into top-down, light-chain–based, and bottom-up, clonotypic approaches.1 Prior reports suggest that top-down matrix-assisted laser-desorption/ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) MS show potential to sensitively identify residual M-protein persistence and recurrence, thus complementing conventional bone-marrow measurable residual disease (MRD), one of the strongest surrogate biomarkers of progression-free-survival (PFS) and overall survival in MM.2-7 Despite therapeutic advances, relapse remains common,8 with current MRD methods requiring invasive, resource-intensive bone-marrow sampling that may only incompletely reflect systemic disease.
Here, we present a large patient cohort derived from the GMMG-HD7 trial,9,10 evaluating MALDI-TOF MS for the assessment of measurable residual activity (MRA) in MM, leveraging longitudinal baseline and follow-up samples.
METHODS
Our aim was to correlate MS-based MRA (EXENT11,12) with clinical outcomes, and establish the utility of this emerging technology as a practical tool aiding disease monitoring in clinical practice. The analysis comprised 3,301 serum samples from 617 patients (Table 1) at defined time points: baseline, after induction (IND), after autologous stem-cell transplant (ASCT), 12 months from start of maintenance (12M MT), 24 months from start of maintenance (24M MT), end of study (EOS), and progressive disease (PD).9,10 Bone-marrow MRD was assessed using next-generation flow cytometry13 at a sensitivity cutoff of 10−5.
TABLE 1.
Baseline Characteristics of Patients With Available Mass Spectrometry Samples at Different Treatment Phases
| Patient and Treatment Characteristic | Baseline | Induction | Last ASCT | 12M MT | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall (N = 617) | MS-Negative (n = 132) | MS-Positive (n = 454) | Overall (n = 586) | MS-Negative (n = 269) | MS-Positive (n = 272) | Overall (n = 541) | MS-Negative (n = 351) | MS-Positive (n = 92) | Overall (n = 443) | |
| Age at random assignment, years | ||||||||||
| Mean (SD) | 58.3 (7.79) | 58.4 (8.37) | 58.1 (7.68) | 58.2 (7.83) | 58.0 (7.89) | 58.0 (7.76) | 58.0 (7.82) | 58.0 (7.87) | 57.9 (7.64) | 58.0 (7.81) |
| Median (min, max) | 59.0 (26.0, 70.0) | 59.0 (26.0, 70.0) | 59.0 (31.0, 70.0) | 59.0 (26.0, 70.0) | 59.0 (26.0, 70.0) | 59.0 (31.0, 70.0) | 59.0 (26.0, 70.0) | 59.0 (26.0, 70.0) | 59.0 (38.0, 70.0) | 59.0 (26.0, 70.0) |
| Sex, No. (%) | ||||||||||
| Male | 382 (61.9) | 79 (59.8) | 285 (62.8) | 364 (62.1) | 163 (60.6) | 169 (62.1) | 332 (61.4) | 205 (58.4) | 66 (71.7) | 271 (61.2) |
| Female | 235 (38.1) | 53 (40.2) | 169 (37.2) | 222 (37.9) | 106 (39.4) | 103 (37.9) | 209 (38.6) | 146 (41.6) | 26 (28.3) | 172 (38.8) |
| Ethnicity, No. (%) | ||||||||||
| Caucasian | 611 (99.0) | 130 (98.5) | 450 (99.1) | 580 (99.0) | 266 (98.9) | 270 (99.3) | 536 (99.1) | 347 (98.9) | 91 (98.9) | 438 (98.9) |
| African | 2 (0.3) | 1 (0.8) | 1 (0.2) | 2 (0.3) | 1 (0.4) | 0 (0) | 1 (0.2) | 1 (0.3) | 0 (0) | 1 (0.2) |
| Other | 4 (0.6) | 1 (0.8) | 3 (0.7) | 4 (0.7) | 2 (0.7) | 2 (0.7) | 4 (0.7) | 3 (0.9) | 1 (1.1) | 4 (0.9) |
| WHO PS, No. (%) | ||||||||||
| 0 | 308 (49.9) | 69 (52.3) | 230 (50.7) | 299 (51.0) | 137 (50.9) | 141 (51.8) | 278 (51.4) | 180 (51.3) | 51 (55.4) | 231 (52.1) |
| 1 | 250 (40.5) | 52 (39.4) | 181 (39.9) | 233 (39.8) | 108 (40.1) | 108 (39.7) | 216 (39.9) | 143 (40.7) | 31 (33.7) | 174 (39.3) |
| 2 | 57 (9.2) | 9 (6.8) | 43 (9.5) | 52 (8.9) | 22 (8.2) | 23 (8.5) | 45 (8.3) | 27 (7.7) | 10 (10.9) | 37 (8.4) |
| 3 | 1 (0.2) | 1 (0.8) | 0 (0) | 1 (0.2) | 1 (0.4) | 0 (0) | 1 (0.2) | 1 (0.3) | 0 (0) | 1 (0.2) |
| Missing | 1 (0.2) | 1 (0.8) | 0 (0) | 1 (0.2) | 1 (0.4) | 0 (0) | 1 (0.2) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| First random assignment (induction treatment arm), No. (%) | ||||||||||
| IA (RVd) | 300 (48.6) | 53 (40.2) | 230 (50.7) | 283 (48.3) | 113 (42.0) | 139 (51.1) | 252 (46.6) | 153 (43.6) | 51 (55.4) | 204 (46.0) |
| IB (Isa-RVd) | 317 (51.4) | 79 (59.8) | 224 (49.3) | 303 (51.7) | 156 (58.0) | 133 (48.9) | 289 (53.4) | 198 (56.4) | 41 (44.6) | 239 (54.0) |
| MM type, No. (%) | ||||||||||
| IgA | 132 (21.4) | 33 (25.0) | 92 (20.3) | 125 (21.3) | 66 (24.5) | 51 (18.8) | 117 (21.6) | 71 (20.2) | 23 (25.0) | 94 (21.2) |
| IgG | 361 (58.5) | 27 (20.5) | 317 (69.8) | 344 (58.7) | 118 (43.9) | 193 (71.0) | 311 (57.5) | 196 (55.8) | 61 (66.3) | 257 (58.0) |
| IgD | 5 (0.8) | 4 (3.0) | 1 (0.2) | 5 (0.9) | 4 (1.5) | 1 (0.4) | 5 (0.9) | 4 (1.1) | 0 (0) | 4 (0.9) |
| IgM | 3 (0.5) | 0 (0) | 3 (0.7) | 3 (0.5) | 1 (0.4) | 2 (0.7) | 3 (0.6) | 2 (0.6) | 0 (0) | 2 (0.5) |
| Light chain myeloma | 108 (17.5) | 68 (51.5) | 34 (7.5) | 102 (17.4) | 77 (28.6) | 21 (7.7) | 98 (18.1) | 73 (20.8) | 6 (6.5) | 79 (17.8) |
| Biclonal | 8 (1.3) | 0 (0) | 7 (1.5) | 7 (1.2) | 3 (1.1) | 4 (1.5) | 7 (1.3) | 5 (1.4) | 2 (2.2) | 7 (1.6) |
| Cytogenetic risk,a No. (%) | ||||||||||
| Standard risk | 459 (74.4) | 102 (77.3) | 334 (73.6) | 436 (74.4) | 185 (68.8) | 218 (80.1) | 403 (74.5) | 268 (76.4) | 74 (80.4) | 342 (77.2) |
| High risk | 118 (19.1) | 22 (16.7) | 91 (20.0) | 113 (19.3) | 63 (23.4) | 39 (14.3) | 102 (18.9) | 58 (16.5) | 15 (16.3) | 73 (16.5) |
| Unknown | 40 (6.5) | 8 (6.1) | 29 (6.4) | 37 (6.3) | 21 (7.8) | 15 (5.5) | 36 (6.7) | 25 (7.1) | 3 (3.3) | 28 (6.3) |
| R-ISS, No. (%) | ||||||||||
| R-ISS stage I | 167 (27.1) | 47 (35.6) | 110 (24.2) | 157 (26.8) | 74 (27.5) | 74 (27.2) | 148 (27.4) | 112 (31.9) | 21 (22.8) | 133 (30.0) |
| R-ISS stage II | 375 (60.8) | 70 (53.0) | 290 (63.9) | 360 (61.4) | 153 (56.9) | 178 (65.4) | 331 (61.2) | 197 (56.1) | 65 (70.7) | 262 (59.1) |
| R-ISS stage III | 49 (7.9) | 9 (6.8) | 36 (7.9) | 45 (7.7) | 27 (10.0) | 12 (4.4) | 39 (7.2) | 25 (7.1) | 4 (4.3) | 29 (6.5) |
| Not classified | 26 (4.2) | 6 (4.5) | 18 (4.0) | 24 (4.1) | 15 (5.6) | 8 (2.9) | 23 (4.3) | 17 (4.8) | 2 (2.2) | 19 (4.3) |
| Renal impairment,b No. (%) | ||||||||||
| No | 579 (93.8) | 121 (91.7) | 428 (94.3) | 549 (93.7) | 253 (94.1) | 256 (94.1) | 509 (94.1) | 330 (94.0) | 88 (95.7) | 418 (94.4) |
| Yes | 38 (6.2) | 11 (8.3) | 26 (5.7) | 37 (6.3) | 16 (5.9) | 16 (5.9) | 32 (5.9) | 21 (6.0) | 4 (4.3) | 25 (5.6) |
Abbreviations: ASCT, autologous stem-cell transplant; Ig, immunoglobulin; MS, mass spectrometry; MT, maintenance; PS, performance status; R-ISS, revised international staging system.
Presence of del(17p) or translocation t(4;14) or translocation (14;16).
Defined as estimated creatinine clearance of <40 mL/min or serum creatinine of more than 177 μmol/L.
The trial was approved by ethics committees at all study sites. All patients provided written informed consent. Detailed methodology is provided in the Data Supplement (online only).
RESULTS
Prognostic Impact of MRA Testing by MS
In line with prior reports,2-5 the EXENT System distinguished accurately between M protein and therapeutic antibodies across longitudinal samples, reliably reidentifying baseline M proteins at relapse, including cases with mass-shifted light chains (Data Supplement, Fig S1). As shown in Figs 1 and 2A, MS status demonstrated a statistically significant prognostic value for PFS (eg, 12M MT: hazard ratio [HR], 0.25 [95% CI, 0.15 to 0.43]; adjusted P < .001). Prognostic impact of MS became most pronounced at later time points.
FIG 1.
Kaplan-Meier plots alongside Holm-Bonferroni–adjusted (global) log-rank tests comparing PFS by MS status (left column) and MS/MRD combined status (right column). Landmark analyses are shown at the main time points: (A and B) after induction, (C and D) after last ASCT, and (E and F) after 12 months of maintenance. 12M MT, 12 months from start of maintenance; ASCT, autologous stem-cell transplant; MRD, measurable residual disease; MS, mass spectrometry; PFS, progression-free survival.
FIG 2.
(A) Forest plot showing multivariate (age, sex, treatment arm [first randomization], and R-ISS) Cox model–derived hazard ratios and 95% CIs alongside unadjusted and Holm-Bonferroni–adjusted P values for MS status only (Figs 1A, 1C, and 1E) and MS/MRD combined (Figs 1B, 1D, and 1F) status. The 95% CIs for the hazard ratios are unadjusted. (B) Stacked bar plot showing the distributions of discordant (to the left) and concordant (to the right) MS/MRD status across time points. (C) Flow plot showing the transitions between MS status across main time points. EOS, end of study; IND, induction; MRD, measurable residual disease; MS, mass spectrometry; MT, maintenance; PD, progressive disease; R-ISS, revised international staging system.
Prognostic Impact of Combined MRA and MRD Assessment
MS/MRD double-negative patients exhibited significantly superior PFS versus double-positive patients (eg, 12M MT: HR, 0.08 [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.17]; P < .001) when combined with paired bone-marrow MRD assessments. By contrast, MS–/MRD+ and MS+/MRD– patients showed PFS comparable with double-negative patients (eg, 12M MT: MS+/MRD–: HR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.33]; adjusted P < .001; MS–/MRD+: HR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.87]; adjusted P = .108). This trend was mirrored in exploratory subgroup analysis for free-light-chain MM (Data Supplement, Fig S2) and for continued (IND to ASCT) MS/MRD analysis (Data Supplement, Fig S3). Assessment of later time points will be prioritized as additional follow-up data accrue.
In all, we observed an MS/MRD concordance rate of 62.7% after IND, rising to around 85% after 12M MT with an overall concordance rate of 74.4%, comparable with previous studies3 (Fig 2B). This was in part driven by early immunoglobulin G (IgG)-recycling–associated14-17 elevated MS positivity despite deep therapeutic response (Data Supplement, Fig S4). Overall MS-/MRD+ rates were low (3.8%). For PD samples, MS/MRD concordance rate was at 92.9% with no MS–/MRD+ samples observed. The small group (n = 3) of concordant negative PD samples comprised patients who experienced hyposecretory/asecretory radiologic PD below the serum electrophoresis (SPEP) quantifiability threshold. After IND, ASCT, and 12M MT, 22.7%, 48.9%, and 78.1% of all patients, respectively, were negative by MS (Fig 2C). An MS negativity rate of around 78% was observed for time points after 12M MT.
MS Enables Enhanced Assessment of M Protein
MS closely matched SPEP regarding M-protein concentrations in samples positive by both while showing superior accuracy at low concentrations. MS yielded higher values for MRD+ versus MRD– samples and identified more samples within 3 months of PD when lower thresholds (from ≥5 to ≥3 g/L increase from nadir) were applied (Data Supplement, Fig S5). Across time points, MS showed the highest positivity rates and, together with MRD, SPEP, and immunofixation (IFE), stratified risk, with all-negative patients exhibiting superior PFS (Data Supplement, Fig S6). The largest groups comprised samples concordant across all tests.
Approximately 13% of patients had a mass-shifted light chain (MSL) as the baseline major clone. Multivariate Cox models did not detect a significant overall risk associated with MSL status; however, subgroup analyses suggest a potentially adverse effect for MS-positive IgG MM, most apparent after induction and during maintenance (Data Supplement, Fig S7). As demonstrated alongside Data Supplement (Fig S4), MS-based stratification yielded stronger curve separation and discriminative efficiency in IgA MM compared with IgG MM during maintenance.
DISCUSSION
In this study, we demonstrated that serum MALDI-TOF MS reliably detects and tracks M proteins with high analytical sensitivity and strong prognostic relevance. MRA by MS closely mirrors and complements bone-marrow MRD assessment, highlighting its role as a minimally invasive biomarker for disease monitoring in MM.
MRA negativity was consistently associated with superior PFS across time points, and MRD/MRA double-positive patients consistently exhibited inferior outcomes, confirming that residual disease activity remains a key driver of relapse even in the era of highly effective therapy regimens. The prognostic separation deepened over time, as shown in previous reports,2-4 underscoring the clinical significance of continued systemic clearance of monoclonal protein as a surrogate for deep therapeutic response. Notably, even qualitative-only exploratory assessment of free-light-chain-type MM based on total light chain (κ/λ) immunopurification was already predictive of PFS. Even at this early time point, continuous MS/MRD negativity between IND and last ASCT suggested superior PFS. Comprehensive interpretation of longitudinal MS trajectories is constrained by the currently immature survival data; however, forthcoming results from the second randomization of the GMMG-HD7 trial will be critical to allow a more robust analysis.
Although MRA and MRD became increasingly concordant at later time points, partial discordance was common early in treatment, especially among IgG-type MM. This likely reflects the biological persistence of IgG due to FcRn-mediated recycling and thus extended serum half-life14-17 rather than actual residual clonal activity in many cases, an important limitation previously discussed.2,3 By contrast, patients with IgA type or free-light-chain-type MM showed closer temporal MRA/MRD alignment, supporting the interpretation that shorter-lived immunoglobulins better reflect dynamic disease clearance. These immunobiologic differences will be important to consider when integrating MS into response evaluation frameworks.
MRA demonstrated superior sensitivity over IFE and strong quantitative correlation with SPEP with heightened accuracy and sensitivity particularly in the low-concentration range where SPEP loses adequate resolution.18 Importantly, MS identified low-level residual M protein in a subset of patients deemed negative by conventional assays. In parallel, MRD positivity correlated with higher M-protein concentrations by MS. Among most frequent MS/IFE/SPEP/MRD combinations, the all-negative group showed the best PFS versus the all-positive group. Next were patients with MS-only positivity, suggesting very low, otherwise undetectable MRA, then those with MRD-only negativity, possibly reflecting asymmetric systemic MRA inaccessible to local sampling.
This study thus provides comprehensive evidence that serum MS is a clinically meaningful tool for assessing residual disease in MM. Limitations include the absence of standardized quantitative cutoffs for defining biochemical relapse based on MS results and the need for extended follow-up to establish the long-term prognostic value of persistent low-level positivity. Among patients in complete response, MS status currently shows limited prognostic discrimination, pending longer follow-up. Nonetheless, our current data already demonstrate that MRA can potentially serve as a complement to bone-marrow MRD analysis, especially in secretory disease with asymmetric marrow involvement, offering a practical, noninvasive means of disease surveillance with potential to guide therapy intensification or de-escalation strategies. The progressive convergence of MS and MRD results suggests that, at later time points, serum MS may function as an initial screening tool before considering bone-marrow biopsy. Whether this approach is sufficient to safely omit invasive sampling in selected patients will require more mature survival data.
In summary, MRA assessment by MS provides a sensitive and reproducible biomarker, supplementing MRD assessments, especially when considering therapy de-escalation. As treatment strategies move toward sustained MRD-driven precision management, incorporation of serum MRA into future response criteria and clinical trial end points may help define deeper remission states and refine risk-adapted care in MM.
Protocols
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors thank all the participating patients and their families; all involved personnel and physicians at the German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group (GMMG) Centers as well as Heidelberg Myeloma Center, Internal Medicine V, Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, Heidelberg University Hospital and Medical Faculty Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany, the GMMG study office Heidelberg, Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany, and the respective sites of the GMMG-HD7 trial. E.K.M. was funded by the International Myeloma Society (IMS) Career Development Award 2021.
The GMMG investigators are listed in Appendix 1 (online only).
APPENDIX 1. GERMAN-SPEAKING MYELOMA MULTICENTER GROUP (GMMG) HD7 INVESTIGATORS
The following local investigators/centers (in alphabetical order) participated in the GMMG-HD7 trial.
Miriam Ahlborn, Medizinische Klinik III, Hämatologie und Onkologie, Städtisches Klinikum Braunschweig, Braunschweig
Joachim Behringer, Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis Speyer, Speyer
Helga Bernhard, Onkologisches Zentrum, Medizinische Klinik V, Klinikum Darmstadt, Darmstadt
Britta Besemer, Innere Medizin II—Hämatologie, Onkologie, Klinische Immunologie und Rheumatologie, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tübingen
Jörg Bittenbring, Klinik für Innere Medizin I (Onkologie, Hämatologie, Klinische Immunologie und Rheumatologie), Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Homburg
Igor Wolfgang Blau, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Tumorimmunologie, Charité Campus Benjamin Franklin und Campus Virchow—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin
Claus Bolling, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Frankfurt am Main
Amelie Boquoi, Klinik für Hämatologie und Stammzelltransplantation, Universitätsklinikum, Universitätsmedizin Essen, Essen
Daniel Debatin, Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis Heidelberg Gerrit Dingeldein, Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis Darmstadt, Darmstadt
Gerlinde Egerer, Krankenhaus St Vincentius der Evangelische Stadtmission Heidelberg, Heidelberg
Roland Fenk, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Klinische Immunologie, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf
Barbara Ferstl, Medizinische Klinik 5—Hämatologie und Internistische Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen
Stefan Fronhoffs, Zentrum für Ambulante Hämatologie und Onkologie (ZAHO), Standort Siegburg
Tobias Gaska, Klinik für Hämatologie und Onkologie, Brüderkrankenhaus St Josef Paderborn, Paderborn
Thomas Geer, Klinik für Innere Medizin III—Klinik für Onkologie, Hämatologie und Palliativmedizin, Diakonie-Klinikum Schwäbisch Hall, Schwäbisch Hall
Deniz Gezer, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie, Hämostaseologie und Stammzelltransplantation, Uniklinik RWTH Aachen, Aachen
Hartmut Goldschmidt, Medizinische Klinik V, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg und Nationales Centrum für Tumorerkrankungen (NCT), Heidelberg
Martin Görner, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Palliativmedizin, Klinikum Bielefeld, Bielefeld
Ullrich Graeven, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Gastroenterologie, Kliniken Maria Hilf, Mönchengladbach
Mathias Hänel, Klinik für Innere Medizin III—Hämatologie, Onkologie, und Zelltherapie, Klinikum Chemnitz, Chemnitz
Bernhard Heilmeier, Klinik für Onkologie und Hämatologie, Krankenhaus Barmherzige Brüder, Regensburg
Michael Heinsch, Fachbereich Onkologie und Hämatologie, Helios St Johannes Klinik Duisburg, Duisburg
Gerhard Held, Klinik für Innere Medizin 1, Westpfalz-Klinikum, Kaiserslautern
Martin Hoffmann, Medizinische Klinik A, Klinikum Ludwigshafen, Ludwigshafen
Tobias A.W. Holderried, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik III—Innere Medizin mit den Schwerpunkten Onkologie, Hämatologie, Stammzeltransplantationen, Zell-und Immuntherapien, Klinische Immunologie und Rheumatologie, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Bonn
Olaf Hopfer, Medizinische Klinik I, Hämatologie/internistische Onkologie/Hämostaseologie, Klinikum Frankfurt (Oder), Frankfurt (Oder)
Snjezana Janjetovic, Klinik für Hämatologie und Stammzelltransplantation, Helios Klinikum Berlin-Buch, Berlin
Maika Klaiber-Hakimi, Klinik für Onkologie, Hämatologie und Palliativmedizin, Marien Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf
Martine Klausmann, Studienzentrum Aschaffenburg, Aschaffenburg
Stefan Klein, III. Medizinischen Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Mannheim, Mannheim
Wolfgang Knauf, Centrum für Hämatologie und Onkologie, Agaplesion Bethanien Krankenhaus, Frankfurt am Main
Yon-Dschun Ko, Abteilung Hämatologie, Internistische Onkologie, Johanniter-Krankenhaus Bonn Philippe Kostrewa, Klinisches Studienzentrum GmbH, Klinikum Fulda, Fulda
Doris Maria Kraemer, Klinik für Hämatologie und Onkologie, Katholisches Krankenhaus Hagen, Hagen
Stephan Kremers, Gemeinschaftspraxis für Hämatologie und Onkologie, Lebach
Martin Kropff, MVZ Hämatologie und Onkologie, Bluttransfusionswesen, Klinikum Osnabrück
Paul La Rosée, Klinik für Innere Medizin II (Onkologie, Hämatologie, Immunologie, Infektiologie und Palliativmedizin), Schwarzwald-Baar Klinikum Villingen-Schwenningen, Villingen-Schwenningen
Rolf Mahlberg, Innere Medizin 1 (Hämato-Onkologie, Infektiologie, Gastroenterologie), Klinikum Mutterhaus der Borromäerinnen, Trier
Christoph Mann, Hämatologie, Onkologie und Immunologie, Universitätsklinikum Marburg, Marburg
Uwe Martens, Klinik für Innere Medizin III (Hämatologie, Onkologie und Palliativmedizin), SLK- Kliniken Heilbronn, Heilbronn
Ivana von Metzler, Klinik für Innere Medizin, Hämatologie und Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main
Christian Michel, III. Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik—Hämatologie, und Medizinische Onkologie und Pneumologie, Universitätsklinikum Mainz, Mainz
Martin Müller, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Immunologie, KRH Klinikum Siloah, Hannover
Wolfram Pönisch, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I—Hämatologie und Zelltherapie, Internistische Onkologie, Hämostaseologie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Leipzig
Peter Reimer, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Stammzelltransplantation, KEM | Evang. Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen-Werden, Essen
Claudia Riechel, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Palliativmedizin, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart
Armin Riecke, Hämatologie und internistische Onkologie, Bundeswehrkrankenhaus Ulm, Ulm
Hendrik Riesenberg, Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis Bielefeld, Bielefeld
Mark Ringhoffer, Städtisches Klinikum Karslruhe gGmbH, Karlsruhe
Mathias Rummel, Medizinische Klinik IV, Schwerpunktabteilung für Hämatologie, Universitätsklinikum Gießen, Gießen
Volker Runde, Klinik für Innere Medizin—Abteilung Hämatologie und internistische Onkologie, Katholisches Karl-Leisner-Klinikum, Wilhelm-Anton-Hospital, Goch
Hans Jürgen Salwender, Abteilung für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Stammzelltransplantation, Asklepios Klinik St Georg, Hamburg sowie 2. Medizinische Abteilung, Onkologie mit Sektion Hämatologie, Asklepios Klinik Altona, Hamburg
Markus Schaich, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Palliativmedizin, Rems-Murr-Kliniken, Winnenden
Christof Scheid, Klinik I für Innere Medizin—Onkologie, Hämatologie, Klinische Infektiologie, Klinische Immunologie, Hämostaseologie, Internistische Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln
Martin Schmidt-Hieber, 2. Medizinische Klinik (Onkologische Tagesklinik), Carl-Thiem-Klinikum Cottbus, Cottbus
Daniel Schöndube, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Palliativmedizin, Helios Klinikum Bad Saarow, Bad Saarow
Roland Schroers, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie, Stammzelltransplantation und Zelltherapie, Universitätsklinikum, Knappschaftskrankenhaus Bochum, Bochum
Hans-Joachim Schütte, Überörtliche Berufsausübungsgemeinschaft Prof. Dr med. Hans-Joachim Schütte
Evgenii Shumilov, Medizinische Klinik A—Hämatologie, Hämostaseologie, Onkologie und Pneumologie, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Münster
Peter Staib, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Palliativmedizin, St Antonius-Hospital, Eschweiler
Dirk Strumberg, Medizinische Klinik III—Hämatologie/Onkologie, St Elisabeth Gruppe—Katholische Kliniken Rhein-Ruhr, Marien Hospital Herne, Herne
Hans-Joachim Tischler, Abt. Hämatologie, Onkologie, Gerinnungsstörungen und Palliativmedizin, Johannes Wesling Klinikum der Mühlenkreiskliniken, Minden
Karolin Trautmann-Grill, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I—Hämatologie, Zelltherapie und Medizinische Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Dresden an der TU Dresden
Walter Verbeek, Zentrum für Ambulante Hämatologie und Onkologie (ZAHO), Standort Bonn
Rudolf Weide, Institut für Versorgungsforschung in der Onkologie, Koblenz
Eckhart Weidmann, Institut für Klinisch-Onkologische Forschung am Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt am Main
Katja C. Weisel, II. Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg
Maike de Wit, Klinik für Innere Medizin—Hämatologie, Onkologie und Palliativmedizin, Vivantes Klinikum Neukölln, Berlin
The following local investigators/centers (in alphabetical order) participated in the GMMG-HD7 trial as associated trial sites:
Christiane Bernhardt, Gefos Dortmund mbH, Dortmund
Thomas Fietz, Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis, Singen
Jochen Grassinger, MVZ Onkologie Klinikum St Elisabeth Straubing GmbH, Straubing
Peter Immenschuh, Klinikum Hanau, Medizinische Klinik III, Hanau
Georg Köchling, Onkologie Schwarzwald-Alb, Villingen-Schwenningen
Michael Koenigsmann, Mediprojekt GbR, Hannover
Michael Neise, MVZ West GmbH, Hämatologie und Onkologie, Krefeld
Holger Nückel, Hämatologisch-onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis, Bochum
Maria Procaccianti, Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis, Karlsruhe
Stefan Schmitt, Klinikum Mittelbaden gGmbH inkl. MVZ Onkologie gGmbH, Baden-Baden
Andreas Schwarzer, Praxis für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Palliativmedizin, Leipzip
Heike Steiniger, Überörtliche Berufsausübungsgemeinschaft Dr med. Heike Steiniger, Axel Schneider, Oberhausen
Barbara Tschechne, MVZ Onko Medical GmbH Neustadt, Neustadt am Rübenberge
Michael Varvenne, Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis Celle, Celle
Bettina Whitlock, Zollernalb-Klinikum/Onkologische Tagesklinik, Balingen
Matthias Zaiß, PIO—Praxis für Interdisziplinäre Onkologie und Hämatologie, Freiburg
Carsten Ziske, Überörtliche Berufsausübungsgesellschaft Dr H. Forstbauer/PD Dr C. Ziske/Dr R. Reihs/Dr E. Rodermann/A. Thiel, Troisdorf
Jia xiang Jin
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Stemline/Menarini
Roland Fenk
Honoraria: BMS/Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi, Amgen, Takeda, Pfizer
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen, BMS/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer
Britta Besemer
Honoraria: Janssen-Cilag (Inst), Amgen (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), Oncopeptides (Inst), Pfizer (Inst)
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen-Cilag, AMGEN (Inst), Janssen Cilag (Inst)
Amelie Boquoi
Consulting or Advisory Role: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Sanofi, Pfizer, Menarini, GlaxoSmithKline, Regeneron
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen
Ivana von Metzler
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Amgen, Sanofi, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, BMS GmbH & Co KG, GlaxoSmithKline, Stemline Therapeutics
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen
Mathias Hänel
Honoraria: Kite, a Gilead company, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen
Consulting or Advisory Role: BMS GmbH & Co KG, Kite/Gilead, Amgen, Janssen, BeiGene, Sobi, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Sanofi, Kite, a Gilead company, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Amgen, BMS GmbH & Co KG
Christoph Mann
Consulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Janssen
Lisa B. Leypoldt
Honoraria: Janssen, Sanofi, Sanofi, Adaptive Biotechnologies, AbbVie, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Regeneron, Amgen, Takeda, AstraZeneca
Consulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene
Research Funding: GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), AbbVie (Inst), Amgen
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, AbbVie, Oncopeptides, JNJ
Bernhard Heilmeier
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Kite/Gilead
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: SOBI, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Kite/Gilead, Sanofi
Christof Scheid
Employment: University of Cologne
Honoraria: Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Janssen Oncology, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, Sanofi/Aventis, GlaxoSmithKline, Stemline Therapeutics, Oncopeptides, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Pierre Fabre
Consulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Roche, Janssen Oncology, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi/Aventis, Cellex GmbH
Research Funding: Janssen Oncology (Inst), Takeda (Inst), Novartis (Inst)
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Janssen Oncology, Amgen
Thorsten Peters-Regehr
Employment: The Binding Site
Leadership: The Binding Site
Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Thermo Fisher Scientific
Carsten Müller-Tidow
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Pfizer, BiolineRx
Research Funding: BiolineRx, Pfizer, Janssen, Daichi (Inst)
Other Relationship: Multiple pharmaceutical and biotech companies provide financial support for preclinical research and clinical trials in the Department. Also, multiple companies provide financial support for research and educational meetings which are organized by the Department (Inst)
Tobias A.W. Holderried
Honoraria: Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Jazz Pharmaceuticals
Consulting or Advisory Role: GlaxoSmithKline, Amgen, Novartis, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Kite/Gilead, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Pfizer, Sanofi, AbbVie, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie, Kite/Gilead, Sanofi, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, immatics, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Amgen, Astellas Pharma, Neovii, GlaxoSmithKline, SOBI, immatics
Karolin Trautmann-Grill
Honoraria: Novartis, Takeda, Amgen, SOBI, Sanofi
Consulting or Advisory Role: SOBI, Grifols, Amgen, Roche, Takeda, Sanofi, Novo Nordisk
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: SOBI, Novo Nordisk
Deniz Gezer
Honoraria: GlaxoSmithKline
Consulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Janssen Oncology, Sanofi Aventis GmbH, Stemline Therapeutics, Pfizer
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Pfizer, Amgen
Evgenii Shumilov
Honoraria: Amgen, Sanofi, Stemline, BMS, Incyte, Takeda, Pfizer, Oncopeptides
Consulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi, Stemline, Amgen, Takeda, Pfizer, Sobi, BMS, Oncopeptides
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Amgen, Sanofi, Takeda, Oncopeptides
Wolfgang Knauf
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Sanofi
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen
Christian S. Michel
Employment: Sanofi (I)
Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Sanofi (I)
Honoraria: Bristol Myers Squibb, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Oncopeptides, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer
Consulting or Advisory Role: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Oncopeptides, Pfizer
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen
Christoph Lutz
Consulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Eisai, BMS, Janssen
Speakers' Bureau: Novartis
Research Funding: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen
Marc S. Raab
Honoraria: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi, Pfizer
Consulting or Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene (Inst), Amgen (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), Janssen (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), Pfizer (Inst)
Research Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene (Inst), Janssen (Inst), Sanofi (Inst)
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Sanofi, Pfizer
Niels Weinhold
Honoraria: GlaxoSmithKline
Consulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi
Research Funding: Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb
Martin Hoffmann
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen Oncology, Pfizer
Katja C. Weisel
Honoraria: Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen-Cilag, GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, Sanofi, AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Oncopeptides, Roche, Stemline Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Regeneron
Consulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi, Roche, Regeneron, AbbVie, BeiGene, Pfizer, CellCentric, AstraZeneca, Oncopeptides, Stemline Therapeutics
Research Funding: Amgen (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), Janssen-Cilag (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), AbbVie (Inst)
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen (Inst), Sanofi (Inst)
Hans J. Salwender
Honoraria: Janssen, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Amgen, AbbVie, Stemline Therapeutics, Oncopeptides, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Genzyme, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Roche
Consulting or Advisory Role: Pfizer, Janssen Oncology, Sanofi, Oncopeptides, GlaxoSmithKline, Amgen, AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Roche, Genzyme, Stemline Therapeutics, AstraZeneca
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Amgen, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Janssen, Pfizer, Stemline Therapeutics, Sanofi
Elias K. Mai
Honoraria: Janssen, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Stemline Therapeutics, Oncopeptides
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Takeda, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Stemline Therapeutics, Oncopeptides
Research Funding: Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Takeda, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Takeda, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Stemline Therapeutics
Hartmut Goldschmidt
Honoraria: Janssen-Cilag, Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Oncopeptides
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen-Cilag (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline
Research Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Amgen (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), GlycoMimetics Inc (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), Heidelberg Pharma (Inst), Roche (Inst), Millennium Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Janssen Research & Development (Inst), Oncopeptides (Inst)
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Oncopeptides
No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.
PRIOR PRESENTATION
Presented in part at the American Society of Hematology annual meeting, Orlando, FL, December 8th, 2025.
SUPPORT
Supported by Sanofi and Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene. E.K.M. was funded by the International Myeloma Society (IMS) Career Development Award 2021. This study was also supported by a grant from the Black Swan Research Initiative of the International Myeloma Foundation. The Biobank for Multiple Myeloma, University Hospital Heidelberg & GMMG, was supported by the Dietmar Hopp Foundation and the Medical Faculty of the University Hospital Heidelberg.
CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION
NCT03617731 (GMMG-HD7)
E.K.M. and H.G. contributed equally to this work as senior authors.
Contributor Information
for the German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group (GMMG) HD7 Investigators:
Miriam Ahlborn, Joachim Behringer, Helga Bernhard, Britta Besemer, Jörg Bittenbring, Igor Wolfgang Blau, Claus Bolling, Amelie Boquoi, Daniel Debatin, Gerlinde Egerer, Roland Fenk, Barbara Ferstl, Stefan Fronhoffs, Tobias Gaska, Thomas Geer, Deniz Gezer, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Martin Görner, Ullrich Graeven, Mathias Hänel, Bernhard Heilmeier, Michael Heinsch, Gerhard Held, Martin Hoffmann, Tobias A.W. Holderried, Olaf Hopfer, Snjezana Janjetovic, Maika Klaiber-Hakimi, Martine Klausmann, Stefan Klein, Wolfgang Knauf, Yon-Dschun Ko, Doris Maria Kraemer, Stephan Kremers, Martin Kropff, Paul La Rosée, Rolf Mahlberg, Christoph Mann, Uwe Martens, Ivana von Metzler, Christian Michel, Martin Müller, Wolfram Pönisch, Peter Reimer, Claudia Riechel, Armin Riecke, Hendrik Riesenberg, Mark Ringhoffer, Mathias Rummel, Volker Runde, Hans Jürgen Salwender, Markus Schaich, Christof Scheid, Martin Schmidt-Hieber, Daniel Schöndube, Roland Schroers, Hans-Joachim Schütte, Evgenii Shumilov, Peter Staib, Dirk Strumberg, Hans-Joachim Tischler, Karolin Trautmann-Grill, Walter Verbeek, Rudolf Weide, Eckhart Weidmann, Katja C. Weisel, Maike de Wit, Christiane Bernhardt, Thomas Fietz, Jochen Grassinger, Peter Immenschuh, Georg Köchling, Michael Koenigsmann, Michael Neise, Holger Nückel, Maria Procaccianti, Stefan Schmitt, Andreas Schwarzer, Heike Steiniger, Barbara Tschechne, Michael Varvenne, Bettina Whitlock, Matthias Zaiß, and Carsten Ziske
Data Sharing Statement
Data Supplement
DATA SHARING STATEMENT
A data sharing statement provided by the authors is available with this article at DOI https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO-25-02957. Source data are available upon reasonable request to and decision of the corresponding author and the board of directors of the GMMG.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Conception and design: Jia xiang Jin, Stefanie Huhn, Philipp Reichert, Uta Bertsch, Katja C. Weisel, Elias K. Mai, Hartmut Goldschmidt
Financial support: Carsten Müller-Tidow, Elias K. Mai, Hartmut Goldschmidt
Administrative support: Jia xiang Jin, Uta Bertsch, Steffen Luntz, Elias K. Mai
Provision of study materials or patients: Jia xiang Jin, Stefanie Huhn, Philipp Reichert, Roland Fenk, Amelie Boquoi, Roland Schroers, Ivana von Metzler, Lisa B. Leypoldt, Bernhard Heilmeier, Christof Scheid, Igor W. Blau, Carsten Müller-Tidow, Karolin Trautmann-Grill, Maika Klaiber-Hakimi, Martin Müller, Wolfgang Knauf, Christian S. Michel, Hendrik Riesenberg, Marc S. Raab, Katja C. Weisel, Hans J. Salwender, Elias K. Mai, Hartmut Goldschmidt
Collection and assembly of data: Jia xiang Jin, Varun R. Ginde, Stefanie Huhn, Philipp Reichert, Uta Bertsch, Roland Fenk, Britta Besemer, Amelie Boquoi, Roland Schroers, Ivana von Metzler, Mathias Hänel, Christoph Mann, Lisa B. Leypoldt, Bernhard Heilmeier, Christof Scheid, Thorsten Peters-Regehr, Igor W. Blau, Carsten Müller-Tidow, Steffen Luntz, Tobias A.W. Holderried, Karolin Trautmann-Grill, Maika Klaiber-Hakimi, Martin Müller, Evgenii Shumilov, Wolfgang Knauf, Christian S. Michel, Thomas Geer, Hendrik Riesenberg, Christoph Lutz, Marc S. Raab, Martin Hoffmann, Peter Findeisen, Katja C. Weisel, Hans J. Salwender, Elias K. Mai, Hartmut Goldschmidt
Data analysis and interpretation: Jia xiang Jin, Varun R. Ginde, Uta Bertsch, Roland Fenk, Ivana von Metzler, Deniz Gezer, Martin Müller, Thomas Geer, Niels Weinhold, Axel Benner, Katja C. Weisel, Hans J. Salwender, Elias K. Mai, Hartmut Goldschmidt
Manuscript writing: All authors
Final approval of manuscript: All authors
Accountable for all aspects of the work: All authors
AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Peripheral Measurable Residual Disease Activity Assessment by MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma in the Phase III GMMG-HD7 Trial
The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/jco/authors/author-center.
Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians (Open Payments).
Jia xiang Jin
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Stemline/Menarini
Roland Fenk
Honoraria: BMS/Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi, Amgen, Takeda, Pfizer
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen, BMS/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer
Britta Besemer
Honoraria: Janssen-Cilag (Inst), Amgen (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), Oncopeptides (Inst), Pfizer (Inst)
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen-Cilag, AMGEN (Inst), Janssen Cilag (Inst)
Amelie Boquoi
Consulting or Advisory Role: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Sanofi, Pfizer, Menarini, GlaxoSmithKline, Regeneron
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen
Ivana von Metzler
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Amgen, Sanofi, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, BMS GmbH & Co KG, GlaxoSmithKline, Stemline Therapeutics
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen
Mathias Hänel
Honoraria: Kite, a Gilead company, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen
Consulting or Advisory Role: BMS GmbH & Co KG, Kite/Gilead, Amgen, Janssen, BeiGene, Sobi, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Sanofi, Kite, a Gilead company, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Amgen, BMS GmbH & Co KG
Christoph Mann
Consulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Janssen
Lisa B. Leypoldt
Honoraria: Janssen, Sanofi, Sanofi, Adaptive Biotechnologies, AbbVie, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Regeneron, Amgen, Takeda, AstraZeneca
Consulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene
Research Funding: GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), AbbVie (Inst), Amgen
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, AbbVie, Oncopeptides, JNJ
Bernhard Heilmeier
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Kite/Gilead
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: SOBI, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Kite/Gilead, Sanofi
Christof Scheid
Employment: University of Cologne
Honoraria: Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Janssen Oncology, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, Sanofi/Aventis, GlaxoSmithKline, Stemline Therapeutics, Oncopeptides, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Pierre Fabre
Consulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Roche, Janssen Oncology, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi/Aventis, Cellex GmbH
Research Funding: Janssen Oncology (Inst), Takeda (Inst), Novartis (Inst)
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Janssen Oncology, Amgen
Thorsten Peters-Regehr
Employment: The Binding Site
Leadership: The Binding Site
Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Thermo Fisher Scientific
Carsten Müller-Tidow
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Pfizer, BiolineRx
Research Funding: BiolineRx, Pfizer, Janssen, Daichi (Inst)
Other Relationship: Multiple pharmaceutical and biotech companies provide financial support for preclinical research and clinical trials in the Department. Also, multiple companies provide financial support for research and educational meetings which are organized by the Department (Inst)
Tobias A.W. Holderried
Honoraria: Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Jazz Pharmaceuticals
Consulting or Advisory Role: GlaxoSmithKline, Amgen, Novartis, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Kite/Gilead, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Pfizer, Sanofi, AbbVie, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie, Kite/Gilead, Sanofi, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, immatics, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Amgen, Astellas Pharma, Neovii, GlaxoSmithKline, SOBI, immatics
Karolin Trautmann-Grill
Honoraria: Novartis, Takeda, Amgen, SOBI, Sanofi
Consulting or Advisory Role: SOBI, Grifols, Amgen, Roche, Takeda, Sanofi, Novo Nordisk
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: SOBI, Novo Nordisk
Deniz Gezer
Honoraria: GlaxoSmithKline
Consulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Janssen Oncology, Sanofi Aventis GmbH, Stemline Therapeutics, Pfizer
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Pfizer, Amgen
Evgenii Shumilov
Honoraria: Amgen, Sanofi, Stemline, BMS, Incyte, Takeda, Pfizer, Oncopeptides
Consulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi, Stemline, Amgen, Takeda, Pfizer, Sobi, BMS, Oncopeptides
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Amgen, Sanofi, Takeda, Oncopeptides
Wolfgang Knauf
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Sanofi
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen
Christian S. Michel
Employment: Sanofi (I)
Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Sanofi (I)
Honoraria: Bristol Myers Squibb, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Oncopeptides, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer
Consulting or Advisory Role: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Oncopeptides, Pfizer
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen
Christoph Lutz
Consulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Eisai, BMS, Janssen
Speakers' Bureau: Novartis
Research Funding: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen
Marc S. Raab
Honoraria: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi, Pfizer
Consulting or Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene (Inst), Amgen (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), Janssen (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), Pfizer (Inst)
Research Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene (Inst), Janssen (Inst), Sanofi (Inst)
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Sanofi, Pfizer
Niels Weinhold
Honoraria: GlaxoSmithKline
Consulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi
Research Funding: Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb
Martin Hoffmann
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen Oncology, Pfizer
Katja C. Weisel
Honoraria: Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen-Cilag, GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, Sanofi, AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Oncopeptides, Roche, Stemline Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Regeneron
Consulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi, Roche, Regeneron, AbbVie, BeiGene, Pfizer, CellCentric, AstraZeneca, Oncopeptides, Stemline Therapeutics
Research Funding: Amgen (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), Janssen-Cilag (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), AbbVie (Inst)
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Johnson & Johnson/Janssen (Inst), Sanofi (Inst)
Hans J. Salwender
Honoraria: Janssen, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Amgen, AbbVie, Stemline Therapeutics, Oncopeptides, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Genzyme, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Roche
Consulting or Advisory Role: Pfizer, Janssen Oncology, Sanofi, Oncopeptides, GlaxoSmithKline, Amgen, AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Roche, Genzyme, Stemline Therapeutics, AstraZeneca
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Amgen, BMS GmbH & Co KG, Janssen, Pfizer, Stemline Therapeutics, Sanofi
Elias K. Mai
Honoraria: Janssen, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Stemline Therapeutics, Oncopeptides
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Takeda, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Stemline Therapeutics, Oncopeptides
Research Funding: Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Takeda, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Takeda, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Stemline Therapeutics
Hartmut Goldschmidt
Honoraria: Janssen-Cilag, Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Oncopeptides
Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen-Cilag (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline
Research Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Amgen (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), GlycoMimetics Inc (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), Heidelberg Pharma (Inst), Roche (Inst), Millennium Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Janssen Research & Development (Inst), Oncopeptides (Inst)
Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Oncopeptides
No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.
REFERENCES
- 1.Derman BA, Yee AJ: Clinical applications of mass spectrometry in multiple myeloma. Blood Adv 9:6593-6603, 2025 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Puig N, Agulló C, Contreras T, et al. : Measurable residual disease by mass spectrometry and next-generation flow to assess treatment response in myeloma. Blood 144:2432-2438, 2024 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Kubicki T, Dytfeld D, Barnidge D, et al. : Mass spectrometry-based assessment of M protein in peripheral blood during maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma. Blood 144:955-963, 2024 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Mai EK, Huhn S, Miah K, et al. : Implications and prognostic impact of mass spectrometry in patients with newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma. Blood Cancer J 13:1, 2023 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Claveau J-S, Murray DL, Dispenzieri A, et al. : Value of bone marrow examination in determining response to therapy in patients with multiple myeloma in the context of mass spectrometry-based M-protein assessment. Leukemia 37:1-4, 2023 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Paiva B, Shi Q, Puig N, et al. : Opportunities and challenges for MRD assessment in the clinical management of multiple myeloma. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 22:424-438, 2025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Shi Q, Paiva B, Pederson LD, et al. : Minimal residual disease-based end point for accelerated assessment of clinical trials in multiple myeloma: A pooled analysis of individual patient data from multiple randomized trials. J Clin Oncol 43:1289-1301, 2025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Jin JX, Besemer B, Yilmaz B, et al. : Prospective systematic classification of causes of death in the course of multiple myeloma. Blood Cancer J 15:167, 2025 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Mai EK, Bertsch U, Pozek E, et al. : Isatuximab, lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone induction therapy for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: Final part 1 analysis of the GMMG-HD7 trial. J Clin Oncol 43:1279-1288, 2025 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Goldschmidt H, Mai EK, Bertsch U, et al. : Addition of isatuximab to lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone as induction therapy for newly diagnosed, transplantation-eligible patients with multiple myeloma (GMMG-HD7): Part 1 of an open-label, multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Haematol 9:e810-e821, 2022 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Barnidge D, Sakrikar D, Kubicki T, et al. : Distinguishing daratumumab from endogenous monoclonal proteins in serum from multiple myeloma patients using an automated mass spectrometry system. J Appl Lab Med 10:235-249, 2025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Li K, Barnidge D, Krevvata M, et al. : Comparison of the analytical performance of EXENT®, a mass spectrometry-based assessment of M-Protein, to SPEP and NGS-based MRD in multiple myeloma patient samples. Blood 140:12446-12447, 2022 [Google Scholar]
- 13.Flores-Montero J, Sanoja-Flores L, Paiva B, et al. : Next generation flow for highly sensitive and standardized detection of minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma. Leukemia 31:2094-2103, 2017 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Willrich MAV, Murray DL, Kyle RA: Laboratory testing for monoclonal gammopathies: Focus on monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and smoldering multiple myeloma. Clin Biochem 51:38-47, 2018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Morell A, Terry WD, Waldmann TA: Metabolic properties of IgG subclasses in man. J Clin Invest 49:673-680, 1970 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Oganesyan V, Damschroder MM, Cook KE, et al. : Structural insights into neonatal Fc receptor-based recycling mechanisms. J Biol Chem 289:7812-7824, 2014 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Spiegelberg HL, Fishkin BG: The catabolism of human G immunoglobulins of different heavy chain subclasses. 3. The catabolism of heavy chain disease proteins and of Fc fragments of myeloma proteins. Clin Exp Immunol 10:599-607, 1972 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Jacobs JFM, Turner KA, Graziani MS, et al. : An international multi-center serum protein electrophoresis accuracy and M-protein isotyping study. Part II: Limit of detection and follow-up of patients with small M-proteins. Clin Chem Lab Med 58:547-559, 2020 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
A data sharing statement provided by the authors is available with this article at DOI https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO-25-02957. Source data are available upon reasonable request to and decision of the corresponding author and the board of directors of the GMMG.