SC Versus IV Isatuximab in Combination With Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone in RRMM

VGPR or better rate by IRC using 2016 IMWG criteria: Percentage of participants with sCR, CR, and VGPR. CR: negative immunofixation on serum and urine, disappearance of any STP, <5% plasma cells in BM aspirates \& normal FLC ratio (0.26-1.65). sCR: CR plus no clonal cells in BM biopsy. VGPR: serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation, not electrophoresis;>=90% reduction in serum M-protein plus urine M-protein level<100mg/24h;>=90% decrease in SPD compared to baseline in STP; FLC only:>=90% decrease in difference between involved and uninvolved FLC levels. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The CT4W was the observed plasma concentrations collected on pre-dose at Cycle 2 Day 1 (equivalent to prior to Cycle 2 Day 1) of isatuximab administration dose.

Infusion reactions were graded using National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for AE (NCI-CTCAE) version (v)5.0 criteria: Grade 1: mild transient reaction; infusion interruption not indicated; intervention not indicated. Grade 2: moderate reaction; therapy or infusion interruption indicated but responds promptly to symptomatic treatment; prophylactic medications indicated for <=24 hours. Grade 3/4: severe or life-threatening reaction (Grade 3: prolonged [not rapidly responsive to symptomatic medication and/or brief interruption of infusion]; recurrence of symptoms following initial improvement; hospitalization indicated for clinical sequelae. Grade 4: life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated). Percentage of participants who observed AE of infusion reactions were collected through the electronic case report form (eCRF) as assessed by investigators. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The PESQ-FU consisting of 9 items has been designed to follow up on participant experience and satisfaction regarding the injection method (discomfort, pain, side effects, time saving and satisfaction) and study medication (side effects, worth taking, satisfaction and recommendation). This questionnaire has been adapted based on qualitative interviews with oncology participants. The responses to 'satisfaction with injection method' were recorded as 'very satisfied, satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, dissatisfied and very dissatisfied' at specified timepoints. The total percentage of participants who were very satisfied and satisfied with the injection method (item-8) at Cycle 5 Day 15 is reported here. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

DOR: Time from the date of first response to the date of first occurrence of progressive disease (PD) determined by IRC or death from any cause, whichever occurred first.DOR was determined only for participants who achieved a response (PR or better).If PD/death not observed, participant was censored at date of last valid disease assessment performed prior to initiating further anti-myeloma treatment or analysis cut-off date, whichever occurred first. As per IMWG criteria: PD: increase of >=25% from lowest confirmed value in any 1 of following: serum M-protein (absolute increase>=0.5 gram/deciliter[g/dL]),serum M-protein increase>=1g/dL if lowest M-component >=5g/dL, urine M-component (absolute increase >=200mg/24h), appearance of new lesion(s),>=50% increase from nadir in SPD of >1 lesion or >=50% increase in longest diameter of a previous lesion >1 centimeter (cm) in short axis. PR: as defined in OM1.

TT1R was defined as the time from randomization to the date of first IRC determined response (PR or better) that was subsequently confirmed. PR as per IMWG criteria was defined as >=50% reduction of serum M-protein and reduction in 24h urine M-protein by >=90% or to <200mg/24h. In addition to above, if present at baseline, >=50% reduction in the size SPD of STPs was also required.

TTBR was defined as the time from randomization to the date of first occurrence of IRC determined best overall response (PR or better) that was subsequently confirmed. PR as per IMWG criteria was defined as >=50% reduction of serum M-protein and reduction in 24h urine M-protein by >=90% or to <200mg/24h. In addition to above, if present at baseline,>=50% reduction in the size SPD of STPs was also required.

PFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of first documentation of PD as determined by IRC or the date of death from any cause, whichever came first. Responses were determined according to IMWG criteria. PFS was censored at the date of the last valid disease assessment not showing PD performed prior to initiation of a further anti-myeloma treatment (if any) or the analysis cut-off date, whichever came first.

OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to death from any cause. Participants without death prior to the analysis cut-off date were censored at the last date the participant was known to be alive or the cut-off date, whichever was first.

PFS2 was defined as time from the date of randomization to the date of first documentation of PD (as assessed by Investigator) after initiation of further anti-myeloma treatment or death from any cause, whichever happened first. Same censoring rule applies as in the PFS endpoint.

An AE was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant or clinical study participant, temporally associated with the use of study medication, whether or not considered related to the study medication. SAEs were any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, was a congenital anomaly/birth defect or was a medically important event. TEAEs were defined as AEs that developed, worsened or became serious during the TE period.

The ISRs are defined as AEs related to medication administration with onset typically within 24 hours from the start of the infusion and are graded using NCI-CTCAE v5.0 criteria: Grade 1: tenderness with or without associated symptoms (warmth, erythema, itching). Grade 2: pain; lipodystrophy; edema; phlebitis. Grade 3: ulceration or necrosis severe tissue damage operative intervention indicated. Grade 4: life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated. ISRs were collected through the eCRF. Number of participants with at least 1 ISR is reported. ISRs were applicable only for the SC administration.

Plasma samples were collected at specified timepoints for the assessment of Ctrough.

Percentage of successful injections with investigational isatuximab injector device was defined as completion of administration per provided instructions for use with no use errors or technical issues divided by the total number of injections x 100. Delivery performance of the device was analyzed based on the successful injection rate in the Isa-SC + Pd arm as the investigational isatuximab injector device was used only for SC administration.

A participant with treatment-emergent ADA was a participant with at least 1 treatment induced or treatment boosted ADA at any time during the treatment or follow-up observation period. Treatment-induced ADA was defined as ADAs developed de novo (seroconversion) following administration of the biotherapeutic (ie, formation of ADAs any time after the initial study medication administration in a participant without pre-existing ADAs). Treatment-boosted ADA was defined as pre-existing ADAs that were boosted to a higher level following administration of biotherapeutic (ie, any time after the initial study medication administration) the ADA titer was significantly higher than the baseline titer. Number of participants with treatment-emergent ADAs is presented.

Percentage of participants who responded that they strongly agree or agree at baseline with expectations of pain, discomfort and side effects from the injection method, the injection method would save time, study medication may result in side effects and would be worth taking are reported. PEQ-BL consisted of 7 items. Percentage of participants who ever received medication through IV and/or SC administration are also reported. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

The PESQ-FU consisting of 9 items has been designed to follow up on participant experience and satisfaction regarding the injection method (discomfort, pain, side effects, time saving and satisfaction) and study medication (side effects, worth taking, satisfaction and recommendation). This questionnaire has been adapted based on qualitative interviews with oncology participants. The responses to 'discomfort with injection method' were recorded as 'strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree and strongly disagree' at specified timepoints. Percentage of participants who disagreed and strongly disagreed that they experienced any discomfort with the injection method are reported here. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The PESQ-FU consisting of 9 items has been designed to follow up on participant experience and satisfaction regarding the injection method (discomfort, pain, side effects, time saving and satisfaction) and study medication (side effects, worth taking, satisfaction and recommendation). This questionnaire has been adapted based on qualitative interviews with oncology participants. The responses to 'pain with injection method' were recorded as 'strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree and strongly disagree' at specified timepoints. Percentage of participants who disagreed and strongly disagreed that they experienced any pain with the injection method are reported here. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The PESQ-FU consisting of 9 items has been designed to follow up on participant experience and satisfaction regarding the injection method (discomfort, pain, side effects, time saving and satisfaction) and study medication (side effects, worth taking, satisfaction and recommendation). This questionnaire has been adapted based on qualitative interviews with oncology participants. The responses to 'side effects with injection method' were recorded as 'strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree and strongly disagree' at specified timepoints. Percentage of participants who disagreed and strongly disagreed that they experienced any side effects with the injection method are reported here. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The PESQ-FU consisting of 9 items has been designed to follow up on participant experience and satisfaction regarding the injection method (discomfort, pain, side effects, time saving and satisfaction) and study medication (side effects, worth taking, satisfaction and recommendation). This questionnaire has been adapted based on qualitative interviews with oncology participants. The responses to 'time saving with injection method' were recorded as 'strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree and strongly disagree' at specified timepoints. Percentage of participants who strongly agreed and agreed that they experienced time saving with the injection method are reported here. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The PESQ-FU consisting of 9 items has been designed to follow up on participant experience and satisfaction regarding the injection method (discomfort, pain, side effects, time saving and satisfaction) and study medication (side effects, worth taking, satisfaction and recommendation). This questionnaire has been adapted based on qualitative interviews with oncology participants. The responses to 'satisfaction with injection method' were recorded as 'very satisfied, satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, dissatisfied and very dissatisfied' at specified timepoints. Percentage of participants who were very satisfied and satisfied with the injection method are reported here. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The PESQ-FU consisting of 9 items has been designed to follow up on participant experience and satisfaction regarding the injection method (discomfort, pain, side effects, time saving and satisfaction) and study medication (side effects, worth taking, satisfaction and recommendation). This questionnaire has been adapted based on qualitative interviews with oncology participants. The responses to 'side effects with study medication' were recorded as 'strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree and strongly disagree' at specified timepoints. Percentage of participants who disagreed and strongly disagreed that they experienced any side effects with study medication are reported here. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The PESQ-FU consisting of 9 items has been designed to follow up on participant experience and satisfaction regarding the injection method (discomfort, pain, side effects, time saving and satisfaction) and study medication (side effects, worth taking, satisfaction and recommendation). This questionnaire has been adapted based on qualitative interviews with oncology participants. The responses to 'study medication worth taking' were recorded as 'strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree and strongly disagree' at specified timepoints. Percentage of participants who strongly agreed and agreed that the study medication was worth taking are reported here. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The PESQ-FU consisting of 9 items has been designed to follow up on participant experience and satisfaction regarding the injection method (discomfort, pain, side effects, time saving and satisfaction) and study medication (side effects, worth taking, satisfaction and recommendation). This questionnaire has been adapted based on qualitative interviews with oncology participants. The responses to satisfaction with study medication were recorded as 'very satisfied, satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, dissatisfied and very dissatisfied' at specified timepoints. Percentage of participants who were very satisfied and satisfied with the study medication are reported here. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The PESQ-FU consisting of 9 items has been designed to follow up on participant experience and satisfaction regarding the injection method (discomfort, pain, side effects, time saving and satisfaction) and study medication (side effects, worth taking, satisfaction and recommendation). This questionnaire has been adapted based on qualitative interviews with oncology participants. The responses to 'recommendation of the study medication' were recorded as 'definitely yes, probably yes, unsure, probably not and definitely not' at specified timepoints. Percentage of participants who responded definitely yes and probably yes to the recommendation of study medication are reported here. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The PESQ-EOT consisting of 17 items assessed participant experience and satisfaction regarding the injection method (discomfort, pain, side effects, time saving and satisfaction) and study medication (side effects, worth taking, satisfaction and recommendation) and has been adapted based on qualitative interviews with oncology participants. In addition to the above, this questionnaire also includes additional items to assess whether participants received oncology medications in the past 2 years and if a participant received both IV and SC in the past 2 years, then participant preference on injection method (whether SC or IV). Percentage of participants with response to these additional items (received oncology medications in the past 2 years via IV/SC/both and if received both IV and SC; then the participant preference on injection method) are reported here. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

The 4-item PAT is an internally developed non-disease specific and self-administered assessment which has been debriefed with oncology patients during qualitative interviews. It provided participant insights on the benefits and disadvantages of treatment. Benefits and disadvantages were respectively rated on a 0-10 scale wherein 0=none (not beneficial at all or no disadvantages at all) and 10=maximum (extremely beneficial or extremely disadvantageous). Disadvantages vs benefits were rated on a scale of -3 to 3 wherein -3=disadvantages significantly outweigh the benefits, 0=equal benefits and disadvantages and 3=benefits significantly outweigh the disadvantages. Mean of benefits, disadvantages and disadvantages vs benefits is presented here.

Healthcare utilization at baseline before study medication administration was collected via HRUPQ. The mean number of times in the past 6 months a participant received care in a clinic or hospital emergency room for any health issue including MM or due to MM and at-home care from a nurse or other health professional for any health issue including MM or due to MM is presented. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

Healthcare utilization at baseline before study medication administration was collected via HRUPQ. The mean number of nights in the past 6 month a participant stayed in hospital for any health issue including MM or due to MM and stayed in intensive care unit (ICU) for any health issue including MM or due to MM is presented. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

Healthcare utilization at baseline before study medication administration was collected via HRUPQ. The mean number of times in the past 6 months a participant consulted (had seen or talked to) following healthcare professionals: general doctor or primary care clinician (PCC) who treats a variety of illnesses for any health issue including MM or related to MM, physical or occupational therapist for any health issue including MM or related to MM, mental health professional (e.g. psychiatrist, psychologist, psychiatric nurse) for any health issue including MM or related to MM, medical doctor or clinician who specializes in particular medical disease or issue (specialist) for any health issue including MM or related to MM is presented. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

Medical resource utilization was collected through HRUPQ. Participants were asked to indicate the duration of their hospital visit (from arrival to departure) and the duration of post-treatment monitoring based on their most recent isatuximab administration. The median duration across all visits (starting from Cycle 2) was calculated and reported here.

Medical resource utilization was collected through HRUPQ. Percentage of participants with healthcare professional visit not required by clinical trial since last isatuximab administration was recorded. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

Employment status was assessed via HRUPQ. Percentage of participants who ever retired during the study are reported. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

Employment status was assessed via HRUPQ. Percentage of participants who retired early due to MM are reported. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For GHS/QoL: overall health and quality of life were assessed, rated on a 7-point scale (1: very poor to 7: excellent). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for GHS/QoL and a positive change from baseline represents a healthy/better level of QoL. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For functional scales: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score and a positive change from baseline represents a better level of physical functioning. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For functional scales: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score and a positive change from baseline represents a better level of role functioning. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For functional scales: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score and a positive change from baseline represents a better level of emotional functioning. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For functional scales: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score and a positive change from baseline represents a better level of cognitive functioning. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For functional scales: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score and a positive change from baseline represents a better level of social functioning. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For symptom scales: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for symptoms and a positive change from baseline represents a higher level of symptomatology. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For symptom scales: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for symptoms and a positive change from baseline represents a higher level of symptomatology. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For symptom scales: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for symptoms and a positive change from baseline represents a higher level of symptomatology. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For symptom items: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for symptom items and a positive change from baseline represents a higher level of symptomatology. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For symptom items: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for symptom items and a positive change from baseline represents a higher level of symptomatology. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For symptom items: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for symptom items and a positive change from baseline represents a higher level of symptomatology. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For symptom items: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for symptom items and a positive change from baseline represents a higher level of symptomatology. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For symptom items: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for symptom items and a positive change from baseline represents a higher level of symptomatology. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer specific 30-item instrument that provides a comprehensive assessment of the principal health related QoL dimensions: GHS/QoL (2 items), functional scales (physical [5 items], role [2 items], emotional [4 items], cognitive [2 items], social [2 items]), symptom scales (fatigue [3 items], nausea \& vomiting [2 items], pain [2 items]) and symptom items- 1 item each (dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). For symptom items: questions were rated on a 4-point scale (1: not at all to 4: very much). All of the scales and single-item measures range in score from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for symptom items and a positive change from baseline represents a higher level of financial difficulties. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

The EORTC QLQ-MY20 was used in conjunction with the EORTC QLQ-C30 to assess symptoms and side effects due to the treatment or the disease which impacts health related QoL in participants with MM. It contains 20 items, 4 independent subscales covering 2 functional domains: symptom scales which include disease symptoms (6 items) and side-effects of treatment (10 items) and function scale which include future perspective (3 items) and body image (1 item). Scores for each subscale are based on the 4-point Likert scale ranging from (1: not at all to 4: very much) and transformed from raw scores to linear scales ranging from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for disease symptoms and a positive change from baseline represents more symptoms, worse QoL. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

The EORTC QLQ-MY20 was used in conjunction with the EORTC QLQ-C30 to assess symptoms and side effects due to the treatment or the disease which impacts health related QoL in participants with MM. It contains 20 items, 4 independent subscales covering 2 functional domains: symptom scales which include disease symptoms (6 items) and side-effects of treatment (10 items) and function scale which include future perspective (3 items) and body image (1 item). Scores for each subscale are based on the 4-point Likert scale ranging from (1: not at all to 4: very much) and transformed from raw scores to linear scales ranging from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for side effects of treatment and a positive change from baseline represents more side effects, worse QoL. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

The EORTC QLQ-MY20 was used in conjunction with the EORTC QLQ-C30 to assess symptoms and side effects due to the treatment or the disease which impacts health related QoL in participants with MM. It contains 20 items, 4 independent subscales covering 2 functional domains: symptom scales which include disease symptoms (6 items) and side-effects of treatment (10 items) and function scale which include future perspective (3 items) and body image (1 item). Scores for each subscale are based on the 4-point Likert scale ranging from (1: not at all to 4: very much) and transformed from raw scores to linear scales ranging from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for future perspectives and a positive change from baseline represents better outcomes, better QoL. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

The EORTC QLQ-MY20 was used in conjunction with the EORTC QLQ-C30 to assess symptoms and side effects due to the treatment or the disease which impacts health related QoL in participants with MM. It contains 20 items, 4 independent subscales covering 2 functional domains: symptom scales which include disease symptoms (6 items) and side-effects of treatment (10 items) and function scale which include future perspective (3 items) and body image (1 item). Scores for each subscale are based on the 4-point Likert scale ranging from (1: not at all to 4: very much) and transformed from raw scores to linear scales ranging from 0 to 100; mean is presented here. A higher score for body image and a positive change from baseline represents better outcomes, better QoL. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

The EQ-5D-5L is a standardized measure of health status that provides a simple, generic measure of health utility, and consists of 2 sections: descriptive and a VAS. The descriptive system consists of 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems, and extreme problems. The VAS records the respondent's self-rated health on a 20-cm vertical scale ranging from 0: the worst health you can imagine to 100: the best health you can imagine. Change from baseline in VAS is reported here. A higher score in VAS and positive change from baseline represents a better level of QoL. The baseline value was defined as the last non-missing value collected on or before the start date of study medication.

BM aspirate was collected for fluorescent in situ hybridization for analysis of del[17p], t[4;14], t[14;16]) and 1q21+. ORR was also evaluated based on IRC assessment by disease characteristics. ORR for participants with at least 1 chromosomal abnormality i.e. [del(17p)] or [1q21+ and t(4;14) or t(14;16)] is presented. Percentages are rounded off to the tenth decimal place.