Adrian Alegre

Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone versus high-dose dexamethasone alone for patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM-003): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Few effective treatments exist for patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma not responding to treatment with bortezomib and lenalidomide. Pomalidomide alone has shown limited efficacy in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma, but synergistic effects have been noted when combined with dexamethasone. We compared the efficacy and safety of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone with high-dose dexamethasone alone in these patients. METHODS This multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial was undertaken in Australia, Canada, Europe, Russia, and the USA. Patients were eligible if they had been diagnosed with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma, and had failed at least two previous treatments of bortezomib and lenalidomide. They were assigned in a 2:1 ratio with a validated interactive voice and internet response system to either 28 day cycles of pomalidomide (4 mg/day on days 1-21, orally) plus low-dose dexamethasone (40 mg/day on days 1, 8, 15, and 22, orally) or high-dose dexamethasone (40 mg/day on days 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20, orally) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were age (≤75 years vs >75 years), disease population (refractory vs relapsed and refractory vs bortezomib intolerant), and number of previous treatments (two vs more than two). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01311687, and with EudraCT, number 2010-019820-30. FINDINGS The accrual for the study has been completed and the analyses are presented. 302 patients were randomly assigned to receive pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone and 153 high-dose dexamethasone. After a median follow-up of 10·0 months (IQR 7·2-13·2), median PFS with pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone was 4·0 months (95% CI 3·6-4·7) versus 1·9 months (1·9-2·2) with high-dose dexamethasone (hazard ratio 0·48 [95% CI 0·39-0·60]; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 haematological adverse events in the pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone and high-dose dexamethasone groups were neutropenia (143 [48%] of 300 vs 24 [16%] of 150, respectively), anaemia (99 [33%] vs 55 [37%], respectively), and thrombocytopenia (67 [22%] vs 39 [26%], respectively). Grade 3-4 non-haematological adverse events in the pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone and high-dose dexamethasone groups included pneumonia (38 [13%] vs 12 [8%], respectively), bone pain (21 [7%] vs seven [5%], respectively), and fatigue (16 [5%] vs nine [6%], respectively). There were 11 (4%) treatment-related adverse events leading to death in the pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone group and seven (5%) in the high-dose dexamethasone group. INTERPRETATION Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone, an oral regimen, could be considered a new treatment option in patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. FUNDING Celgene Corporation.

Influence of Pre- and Post-Transplantation Responses on Outcome of Patients With Multiple Myeloma: Sequential Improvement of Response and Achievement of Complete Response Are Associated With Longer Survival

PURPOSE Complete response (CR) is considered an important goal in most hematologic malignancies. However, in multiple myeloma (MM), there is no consensus regarding whether immunofixation (IF)-negative CR, IF-positive near-CR (nCR), and partial response (PR) are associated with different survivals. We evaluated the prognostic influence on event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) of these responses pre- and post-transplantation in newly diagnosed patients with MM. PATIENTS AND METHODS We analyzed 632 patients from the prospective Grupo Español de Mieloma 2000 protocol who were uniformly treated with vincristine, carmustine, cyclophosphamide, melphalan, and predisone/vincristine, carmustine, adryamcine, and dexamethasone induction followed by high-dose therapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation. RESULTS Post-transplantation response markedly influenced outcomes. Patients achieving CR had significantly longer EFS (median, 61 v 40 months; P < 10(-5)) and OS (medians not reached; P = .01) versus patients achieving nCR, who likewise had somewhat better outcomes compared with patients achieving PR (median EFS, 34 months, P = .07 v nCR; median OS, 61 months, P = .04). EFS and OS and influence of response were similar among older (age 65 to 70 years) and younger (age < 65 years) patients. Similar findings were observed with pretransplantation response, with trends toward EFS (P = .1; P = .05) and OS (P = .1; P = .07) benefit in patients achieving CR versus nCR and PR, respectively. Post-transplantation response was markedly influenced by pretransplantation response; improvements in response were associated with prolonged survival. CONCLUSION Quality of response post-transplantation, notably CR, is significantly associated with EFS and OS prolongation in newly diagnosed patients with MM. There were trends toward similar associations with pretransplantation response status.

Long-term prognostic significance of response in multiple myeloma after stem cell transplantation

For establishing the true effect of different response categories in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) treated with autologous stem cell transplantation, we evaluated, after a median follow-up of 153 months, 344 patients with MM who received a transplant between 1989 and 1998. Overall survival (OS) at 12 years was 35% in complete response (CR) patients, 22% in near complete response (nCR), 16% in very good partial response (VGPR), and 16% in partial response (PR) groups. Significant differences in OS and progression-free survival were found between CR and nCR groups (P = .01 and P = .002, respectively), between CR and VGPR groups (P = .0001 and P = .003), or between CR and PR groups (P = .003 and P = < 10(-5)); no differences were observed between the nCR and VGPR groups (P = .2 and P = .9) or between these groups and the PR group (P = .1 and P = .8). A landmark study found a plateau phase in OS after 11 years; 35% patients in the CR group and 11% in the nCR+VGPR+PR group are alive at 17 years; 2 cases had relapsed in the nCR+VGPR+PR group. In conclusion, MM achieving CR after autologous stem cell transplantation is a central prognostic factor. The relapse rate is low in patients with > 11 years of follow-up, possibly signifying a cure for patients in CR.

Remission status defined by immunofixation vs.electrophoresis after autologous transplantation has a major impact on the outcome of multiple myeloma patients

We have retrospectively analysed 344 multiple myeloma (MM) patients (202 de novo patients) treated in a non‐uniform way in whom high‐dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) response was simultaneously measured by both electrophoresis (EP) and immunofixation (IF). Patients in complete remission (CR) by EP were further subclassified as CR1 when IF was negative and CR2 when it remained positive. Partial responders (PR) were also subclassified as PR1 (very good PR, > 90% reduction in M‐component) or PR2 (50–90% reduction). CR1 patients showed a significantly better event‐free survival (EFS) [35% at 5 years, 95% confidence interval (CI) 17–53, median 46 months] and overall survival (OS) (72% at 5 years, CI 57–86, median not reached) compared with any other response group (univariate comparison P < 0·00000 to P = 0·004). In contrast, comparison of CR2 with PR1 and with PR2 did not define different prognostic subgroups (median EFS 30, 30 and 26 months respectively, P = 0·6; median survival 56, 44 and 42 months respectively, P = 0·5). The non‐responding patients had the worst outcome (5‐year OS 8%, median 7 months). Multivariate analysis confirmed both the absence of differences among CR2, PR1 and PR2 and the highly discriminatory prognostic capacity of a three‐category classification: (i) CR1 (ii) CR2 + PR1 + PR2, and (iii) non‐response (EFS P < 0·00000; OS P < 0·00000; both Cox models P < 0·00000). In the logistic regression analysis, the factors significantly associated with failure to achieve CR1 were the use of two or more up‐front chemotherapy lines, status of non‐response pre‐ASCT and inclusion of total body irradiation (TBI) in the preparative regimen. Tandem transplants or the use of multiple agents (busulphan and melphalan) in the preparative regimen resulted in a higher CR1 level; none of the biological factors explored influenced the possibility of achieving CR1. These results confirm that, in MM patients undergoing ASCT, achieving a negative IF identifies the patient subset with the best prognosis; accordingly, therapeutic strategies should be specifically designed to achieve negative IF.

Phase II Pethema Trial of Alternating Bortezomib and Dexamethasone As Induction Regimen Before Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation in Younger Patients With Multiple Myeloma: Efficacy and Clinical Implications of Tumor Response Kinetics

PURPOSE This is the first study in which bortezomib and dexamethasone were administered on an alternating basis as up-front therapy in multiple myeloma (MM). We investigated the efficacy and kinetics of response to each drug and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed MM who were less than 66 years old were treated with bortezomib at 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 (cycles 1, 3, and 5) and dexamethasone 40 mg orally on days 1 through 4, 9 to 12, and 17 to 20 (cycles 2, 4, and 6), followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT). Responses were evaluated by modified European Bone Marrow Transplantation criteria. Random effects models were used to analyze the tumor response kinetics. RESULTS Forty patients were enrolled. Partial response (PR) or greater was 65% (12.5% complete response [CR], 10% very good PR [VGPR], and 42.5% PR) plus 17.5% minor response. Time to response was rapid, with 82% serum M-protein reduction achieved within the first two cycles. The M-protein decrease was similar with dexamethasone and with bortezomib (P = .48). Chromosome 13 deletion, t(4;14), and t(14;16) did not have a negative impact on response. Toxicity was low, with no grade 3 to 4 peripheral neuropathy and no grade 2 to 4 thrombocytopenia. The response rate after ASCT was 88%, with 33% CR (negative immunofixation) plus 22% VGPR. CONCLUSION Bortezomib alternating with dexamethasone is a highly effective induction regimen with low toxicity. The kinetic study has shown a high degree of heterogeneity in response and rapid effect from both agents, supporting the use of a short induction regimen before ASCT in MM.

Chronic but not acute graft-versus-host disease improves outcome in multiple myeloma patients after non-myeloablative allogeneic transplantation.

Summary. The outcome of 29 multiple myeloma patients receiving fludarabine and melphalan‐based non‐myeloablative allogeneic transplant (NMT) was evaluated. Event‐free survival (EFS) at 24 months was 33%, being significantly higher for patients who developed chronic graft‐versus‐host disease (cGVHD) when compared with those who did not [51%vs 0% respectively, P = 0·02; hazard rate = 3·16 (95% confidence interval = 1·09–9·15, P = 0·03)] as well as for patients transplanted in complete remission/partial response (CR/PR) or stable disease (SD), compared with those with refractory/progressive disease (43%vs 0% respectively, P = 0·02). Overall survival (OS) at 24 months was 60%[72%vs 42% for patients who did and did not develop cGVHD respectively (P = 0·1); 63%vs 41% for patients in CR/PR or SD vs refractory/progressive disease at transplant respectively (P = 0·013)]. At a median follow‐up of 366 d, 13 patients remained in CR/PR (45% overall response rate). Nine patients have died, three of them as a result of disease progression and six (21%) as a result of transplant‐related mortality (TRM). Actuarial incidence of TRM was 37% for patients who developed acute GVHD vs 13% for those who did not (log rank, P = 0·04). The present study suggests that graft‐versus‐myeloma effect is the main weapon for disease control after NMT in MM patients and the efficacy of this immune effect depends on tumour burden before transplant.

Bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone in elderly untreated patients with multiple myeloma: updated time-to-events results and prognostic factors for time to progression

Novel therapeutic agents have become available for patients with multiple myeloma in the last few years. This study conducted by the Spanish PETHEMA and GEM groups investigated the effect of bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone in elderly patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Treatment was highly active and well tolerated, with 85% of patients alive at 3 years. Background New treatment options offering enhanced activity in elderly, newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma are required. One strategy is to combine melphalan and prednisone with novel agents. We previously reported an 89% response rate, including 32% complete responses and 11% near complete responses, in our phase 1/2 study of bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone (VMP) in 60 newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients with a median age of 75 years. Here, we report updated time-to-events data and the impact of poor prognosis factors on outcome. Design and Methods Updated analyses of time to biochemical progression and overall survival with VMP were conducted, and compared with those of historical controls treated with melphalan and prednisone. A univariate analysis was performed to evaluate the influence of known prognostic factors on the time to progression. Results After a median follow-up of 26 months, the median time to progression with VMP was 27.2 months, compared with 20.0 months with melphalan plus prednisone. The median overall survival with VMP was not reached versus 26 months with melphalan and prednisone; the survival rate at 38 months was 85% versus 38%, respectively. Time to progression was not significantly affected by elevated β2-microglobulin or lactate dehydrogenase levels, advanced age, or cytogenetic abnormalities, but was shorter in patients with albumin <3 g/dL, Karnofsky performance status ≤70%, bone marrow plasma cell infiltration ≥40%, and, particularly, high plasma cell proliferative activity (≥2.5% S-phase cells). Conclusions VMP is highly active and well tolerated in elderly patients with newly diagnosed muktiple myeloma, with 85% of patients alive at 3 years. Moreover, VMP may overcome the poor prognostic impact of various factors, particularly cytogenetic abnormalities.

Conditioning regimens in autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma: a comparative study of efficacy and toxicity from the Spanish Registry for Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma

High‐dose chemoradiotherapy conditioning regimens for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) are generally held to give similar results in multiple myeloma (MM), but no specific comparative study has been published. We addressed this issue by comparing the main high‐dose chemoradiotherapy regimens used in the Spanish Registry. Patient cohorts included 315 cases treated with 200 mg/m2 melphalan (MEL200), 127 patients with 140 mg/m2 melphalan plus total body irradiation (MEL140 + TBI) and 121 cases with 12 mg/kg busulphan plus 140 mg/m2 melphalan (BUMEL). After ASCT, granulocyte and platelet recovery time was similar in all conditioning groups. There were no differences in transplant‐related mortality. All regimens yielded a similar response in reference to pre‐ASCT MM status, although BUMEL produced a slightly better overall response when compared with the other regimens (97% vs. 89% and 92%, P = 0·003). The 5‐year overall survival (OS) with BUMEL was 47% [95% confidence interval (CI) 26–68] compared with 43% (CI 31–54) for MEL140 + TBI and 37% (CI: 18–56) for MEL200. The median survival for the BUMEL group was 64 months compared with 45 and 37 months for the MEL200 and MEL140 + TBI groups respectively. These differences were non‐significant (P = 0·2). The median event‐free survival (EFS) was better for BUMEL (32 months) than for MEL200 (22 months) or for MEL140 + TBI (20 months). The differences in EFS between BUMEL and the other conditioning regimens reached statistical significance (P = 0·01). Nevertheless, the adjusted multivariate analysis for OS and EFS revealed that the conditioning regimens had no independent prognostic value. We concluded that three different conditioning regimens, commonly used for ASCT in MM, have a similar antimyeloma effect. However, the trend for better results observed in our series with BUMEL requires a prospective trial.

Busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m2 versus melphalan 200 mg/m2 as conditioning regimens for autologous transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients included in the PETHEMA/GEM2000 study

Background The aim of this study was to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m2 and melphalan 200 mg/m2 as conditioning regimens for autologous stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma in the GEM2000 study. Design and Methods The first 225 patients received oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m2; because of a high frequency of veno-occlusive disease, the protocol was amended and a further 542 patients received melphalan 200 mg/m2. Results Engraftment and hospitalization times were similar in both groups. Oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m2 resulted in higher transplant-related mortality (8.4% versus 3.5%; P=0.002) due to the increased frequency of veno-occlusive disease in this group. Response rates were similar in both arms. With respective median follow-ups of 72 and 47 months, the median progression-free survival was significantly longer with busulfan plus melphalan (41 versus 31 months; P=0.009), although survival was similar to that in the melphalan 200 mg/m2 group. However, access to novel agents as salvage therapy after relapse/progression was significantly lower for patients receiving busulfan plus melphalan (43%) than for those receiving melphalan 200 mg/m2 (58%; P=0.01). Conclusions Conditioning with oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m2 was associated with longer progression-free survival but equivalent survival to that achieved with melphalan 200 mg/m2 but this should be counterbalanced against the higher frequency of veno-occlusive disease-related deaths. This latter fact together with the limited access to novel salvage therapies in patients conditioned with oral busulfan 12 mg/kg plus melphalan 140 mg/m2 may explain the absence of a survival difference. Oral busulfan was used in the present study; use of the intravenous formulation may reduce toxicity and result in greater efficacy, and warrants further investigation in myeloma patients. (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00560053).

Evaluation of minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma patients by fluorescent-polymerase chain reaction: the prognostic impact of achieving molecular response

This study aimed to standardize a simple molecular method for evaluating the response to treatment in multiple myeloma (MM) patients after high dose chemotherapy. Fifty three patients enrolled in the GEM2000 protocol were studied for minimal residual disease (MRD) using both fluorescent‐polymerase chain reaction (F‐PCR) and flow cytometry. Most patients had achieved complete remission or very good response after autologous stem cell transplantation. The molecular analysis of immunoglobulin gene rearrangements at diagnosis and during the follow‐up was carried out by F‐PCR according to the Biomed‐2 protocols. F‐PCR could be used in 91% of the patients and the results were similar to flow cytometry. F‐PCR was able to identify a group of patients with a better prognosis [progression‐free survival (PFS) 67·86% in patients with negative F‐PCR vs. 28%; P = 0·001], even amongst patients who achieved a complete response with negative immunofixation (PFS 75% vs. 25%; P = 0·002). Multivariate analysis identified the F‐PCR result as the only variable to show a prognostic value when PFS was analysed. F‐PCR of DHJ and light chain rearrangements of immunoglobulin genes is a feasible method for evaluating MRD in MM patients after intensive therapy. Achieving molecular response by F‐PCR shows prognostic value.