Cyrille Hulin

Melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide versus melphalan and prednisone alone or reduced-intensity autologous stem cell transplantation in elderly patients with multiple myeloma (IFM 99–06): a randomised trial

BACKGROUND In multiple myeloma, combination chemotherapy with melphalan plus prednisone is still regarded as the standard of care in elderly patients. We assessed whether the addition of thalidomide to this combination, or reduced-intensity stem cell transplantation, would improve survival. METHODS Between May 22, 2000, and Aug 8, 2005, 447 previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma, who were aged between 65 and 75 years, were randomly assigned to receive either melphalan and prednisone (MP; n=196), melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide (MPT; n=125), or reduced-intensity stem cell transplantation using melphalan 100 mg/m2 (MEL100; n=126). The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00367185. FINDINGS After a median follow-up of 51.5 months (IQR 34.4-63.2), median overall survival times were 33.2 months (13.8-54.8) for MP, 51.6 months (26.6-not reached) for MPT, and 38.3 months (13.0-61.6) for MEL100. The MPT regimen was associated with a significantly better overall survival than was the MP regimen (hazard ratio 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.81, p=0.0006) or MEL100 regimen (0.69, 0.49-0.96, p=0.027). No difference was seen for MEL100 versus MP (0.86, 0.65-1.15, p=0.32). INTERPRETATION The results of our trial provide strong evidence to indicate that the use of thalidomide in combination with melphalan and prednisone should, at present, be the reference treatment for previously untreated elderly patients with multiple myeloma.

Lenalidomide maintenance after stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation is a standard treatment for young patients with multiple myeloma. Residual disease is almost always present after transplantation and is responsible for relapse. This phase 3, placebo-controlled trial investigated the efficacy of lenalidomide maintenance therapy after transplantation. METHODS We randomly assigned 614 patients younger than 65 years of age who had nonprogressive disease after first-line transplantation to maintenance treatment with either lenalidomide (10 mg per day for the first 3 months, increased to 15 mg if tolerated) or placebo until relapse. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS Lenalidomide maintenance therapy improved median progression-free survival (41 months, vs. 23 months with placebo; hazard ratio, 0.50; P<0.001). This benefit was observed across all patient subgroups, including those based on the β(2)-microglobulin level, cytogenetic profile, and response after transplantation. With a median follow-up period of 45 months, more than 70% of patients in both groups were alive at 4 years. The rates of grade 3 or 4 peripheral neuropathy were similar in the two groups. The incidence of second primary cancers was 3.1 per 100 patient-years in the lenalidomide group versus 1.2 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group (P=0.002). Median event-free survival (with events that included second primary cancers) was significantly improved with lenalidomide (40 months, vs. 23 months with placebo; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Lenalidomide maintenance after transplantation significantly prolonged progression-free and event-free survival among patients with multiple myeloma. Four years after randomization, overall survival was similar in the two study groups. (Funded by the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00430365.).

Risk of progression and survival in multiple myeloma relapsing after therapy with IMiDs and bortezomib: A multicenter international myeloma working group study

Promising new drugs are being evaluated for treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), but their impact should be measured against the expected outcome in patients failing current therapies. However, the natural history of relapsed disease in the current era remains unclear. We studied 286 patients with relapsed MM, who were refractory to bortezomib and were relapsed following, refractory to or ineligible to receive, an IMiD (immunomodulatory drug), had measurable disease, and ECOG PS of 0, 1 or 2. The date patients satisfied the entry criteria was defined as time zero (T0). The median age at diagnosis was 58 years, and time from diagnosis to T0 was 3.3 years. Following T0, 213 (74%) patients had a treatment recorded with one or more regimens (median=1; range 0–8). The first regimen contained bortezomib in 55 (26%) patients and an IMiD in 70 (33%). A minor response or better was seen to at least one therapy after T0 in 94 patients (44%) including ⩾partial response in 69 (32%). The median overall survival and event-free survival from T0 were 9 and 5 months, respectively. This study confirms the poor outcome, once patients become refractory to current treatments. The results provide context for interpreting ongoing trials of new drugs.

Bortezomib Plus Dexamethasone Is Superior to Vincristine Plus Doxorubicin Plus Dexamethasone As Induction Treatment Prior to Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Results of the IFM 2005-01 Phase III Trial

PURPOSE To compare efficacy and safety of bortezomib plus dexamethasone and vincristine plus doxorubicin plus dexamethasone (VAD) as induction before stem-cell transplantation in previously untreated myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Four hundred eighty-two patients were randomly assigned to VAD (n = 121), VAD plus dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin (DCEP) consolidation (n = 121), bortezomib plus dexamethasone (n = 121), or bortezomib plus dexamethasone plus DCEP (n = 119), followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation. Patients not achieving very good partial response (VGPR) required a second transplantation. The primary end point was postinduction complete response/near complete response (CR/nCR) rate. RESULTS Postinduction CR/nCR (14.8% v 6.4%), at least VGPR (37.7% v 15.1%), and overall response (78.5% v 62.8%) rates were significantly higher with bortezomib plus dexamethasone versus VAD; CR/nCR and at least VGPR rates were higher regardless of disease stage or adverse cytogenetic abnormalities. Response rates were similar in patients who did and did not receive DCEP. Post first transplantation, CR/nCR (35.0% v 18.4%) and at least VGPR (54.3% v 37.2%) rates remained significantly higher with bortezomib plus dexamethasone. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 36.0 months versus 29.7 months (P = .064) with bortezomib plus dexamethasone versus VAD; respective 3-year survival rates were 81.4% and 77.4% (median follow-up, 32.2 months). The incidence of severe adverse events appeared similar between groups, but hematologic toxicity and deaths related to toxicity (zero v seven) were more frequent with VAD. Conversely, rates of grade 2 (20.5% v 10.5%) and grades 3 to 4 (9.2% v 2.5%) peripheral neuropathy during induction through first transplantation were significantly higher with bortezomib plus dexamethasone. CONCLUSION Bortezomib plus dexamethasone significantly improved postinduction and post-transplantation CR/nCR and at least VGPR rates compared with VAD and resulted in a trend for longer PFS. Bortezomib plus dexamethasone should therefore be considered a standard of care in this setting.

Efficacy of Melphalan and Prednisone Plus Thalidomide in Patients Older Than 75 Years With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: IFM 01/01 Trial

PURPOSE Until recently, melphalan and prednisone were the standards of care in elderly patients with multiple myeloma. The addition of thalidomide to this combination demonstrated a survival benefit for patients age 65 to 75 years. This randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial investigated the efficacy of melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide in patients older than 75 years with newly diagnosed myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Between April 2002 and December 2006, 232 previously untreated patients with myeloma, age 75 years or older, were enrolled and 229 were randomly assigned to treatment. All patients received melphalan (0.2 mg/kg/d) plus prednisone (2 mg/kg/d) for 12 courses (day 1 to 4) every 6 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg/d of oral thalidomide (n = 113) or placebo (n = 116), continuously for 72 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 47.5 months, overall survival was significantly longer in patients who received melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide compared with those who received melphalan and prednisone plus placebo (median, 44.0 v 29.1 months; P = .028). Progression-free survival was significantly prolonged in the melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide group (median, 24.1 v 18.5 months; P = .001). Two adverse events were significantly increased in the melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide group: grade 2 to 4 peripheral neuropathy (20% v 5% in the melphalan and prednisone plus placebo group; P < .001) and grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (23% v 9%; P = .003). CONCLUSION This trial confirms the superiority of the combination melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide over melphalan and prednisone alone for prolonging survival in very elderly patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Toxicity was acceptable.

Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone in Transplant-Ineligible Patients with Myeloma

BACKGROUND The combination melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (MPT) is considered a standard therapy for patients with myeloma who are ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. However, emerging data on the use of lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone warrant a prospective comparison of the two approaches. METHODS We randomly assigned 1623 patients to lenalidomide and dexamethasone in 28-day cycles until disease progression (535 patients), to the same combination for 72 weeks (18 cycles; 541 patients), or to MPT for 72 weeks (547 patients). The primary end point was progression-free survival with continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone versus MPT. RESULTS The median progression-free survival was 25.5 months with continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone, 20.7 months with 18 cycles of lenalidomide-dexamethasone, and 21.2 months with MPT (hazard ratio for the risk of progression or death, 0.72 for continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone vs. MPT and 0.70 for continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone vs. 18 cycles of lenalidomide-dexamethasone; P<0.001 for both comparisons). Continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone was superior to MPT for all secondary efficacy end points, including overall survival (at the interim analysis). Overall survival at 4 years was 59% with continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone, 56% with 18 cycles of lenalidomide-dexamethasone, and 51% with MPT. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were somewhat less frequent with continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone than with MPT (70% vs. 78%). As compared with MPT, continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone was associated with fewer hematologic and neurologic toxic events, a moderate increase in infections, and fewer second primary hematologic cancers. CONCLUSIONS As compared with MPT, continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone given until disease progression was associated with a significant improvement in progression-free survival, with an overall survival benefit at the interim analysis, among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. (Funded by Intergroupe, Francophone du Myélome and Celgene; FIRST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00689936; European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials number, 2007-004823-39.).

Bortezomib Plus Dexamethasone Induction Improves Outcome of Patients With t(4;14) Myeloma but Not Outcome of Patients With del(17p)

PURPOSE Cytogenetics is an important prognostic parameter in multiple myeloma (MM). Patients presenting with either t(4;14) or del(17p) are known to have a short event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS). Some preliminary data suggest that bortezomib is able to overcome these prognostic parameters. PATIENTS AND METHODS A series of 507 patients with newly diagnosed MM who received four cycles of bortezomib-dexamethasone induction therapy before high-dose melphalan were analyzed for both t(4;14) and del(17p). RESULTS We found that both t(4;14) and del(17p) remain prognostic parameters, even in the context of bortezomib treatment. However, it is important to note that bortezomib significantly improves the prognosis (in terms of both EFS and OS) of patients with t(4;14), compared with patients treated with vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone induction therapy. In contrast, no improvement was observed for del(17p) patients. CONCLUSION Short-term bortezomib induction improves outcome of patients with t(4;14) but not the outcome of patients with del(17p). However, both abnormalities remain prognostic factors predicting both EFS and OS despite bortezomib induction.

Bortezomib plus dexamethasone versus reduced-dose bortezomib, thalidomide plus dexamethasone as induction treatment before autologous stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

The Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome conducted a randomized trial to compare bortezomib-dexamethasone (VD) as induction before high-dose therapy (HDT) and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) to a combination consisting of reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide plus dexamethasone (vtD) in patients with multiple myeloma. Overall, a total of 199 patients were centrally randomly assigned to receive VD or vtD. After 4 cycles, the complete response (CR) rate was the same in both groups (13% in the vtD arm, 12% in the VD arm, P = .74). However, the CR plus very good partial response (VGPR) rate was significantly higher in the vtD arm (49% vs 36%, P = .05). After ASCT, the CR plus VGPR rate was significantly higher in the vtD arm (74% vs 58%, P = .02). The reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide translated into a reduced incidence of peripheral neuropathy (PN): grade ≥ 2 PN were reported in 34% in the VD arm versus 14% in the vtD arm (P = .001). vtD, including reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide, yields higher VGPR rates compared with VD and can be considered a new effective triplet combination before HDT/ASCT.

Thalidomide for previously untreated elderly patients with multiple myeloma: meta-analysis of 1685 individual patient data from 6 randomized clinical trials

The role of thalidomide for previously untreated elderly patients with multiple myeloma remains unclear. Six randomized controlled trials, launched in or after 2000, compared melphalan and prednisone alone (MP) and with thalidomide (MPT). The effect on overall survival (OS) varied across trials. We carried out a meta-analysis of the 1685 individual patients in these trials. The primary endpoint was OS, and progression-free survival (PFS) and 1-year response rates were secondary endpoints. There was a highly significant benefit to OS from adding thalidomide to MP (hazard ratio = 0.83; 95% confidence interval 0.73-0.94, P = .004), representing increased median OS time of 6.6 months, from 32.7 months (MP) to 39.3 months (MPT). The thalidomide regimen was also associated with superior PFS (hazard ratio = 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.61-0.76, P < .0001) and better 1-year response rates (partial response or better was 59% on MPT and 37% on MP). Although the trials differed in terms of patient baseline characteristics and thalidomide regimens, there was no evidence that treatment affected OS differently according to levels of the prognostic factors. We conclude that thalidomide added to MP improves OS and PFS in previously untreated elderly patients with multiple myeloma, extending the median survival time by on average 20%.

Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone is active and well tolerated in bortezomib and lenalidomide–refractory multiple myeloma: Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome 2009-02

The combination of pomalidomide and dexamethasone can be safely administered to patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and has significant efficacy, although the optimal regimen remains to be determined. Patients with MM whose disease progressed after multiple lines of therapy have limited treatment options. We designed a multicenter, phase 2 randomized study assessing two different dose regimens of pomalidomide and dexamethasone in advanced MM. Treatment response was assessed centrally. Pomalidomide (4 mg) was given orally on days 1 to 21 (arm 21/28) or continuously (arm 28/28) over a 28-day cycle, plus dexamethasone given weekly. Eighty-four patients (43, arm 21/28 and 41, arm 28/28) were randomized. The median number of prior lines was 5. Overall response rate was 35% (arm 21/28) and 34% (arm 28/28), independent of the number of prior lines and level of refractoriness. Median duration of response, time to disease progression, and progression-free survival was 7.3, 5.4, and 4.6 months, respectively, which was similar across cohorts. At 23 months follow-up, median overall survival was 14.9 months, with 44% of the patients alive at 18 months. Toxicity consisted primarily of myelosuppression, which was manageable. The efficacy and safety data presented here, along with data from other phase 2 trials, suggest that pomalidomide 4 mg per day on days 1 to 21 of 28 with dexamethasone should be investigated in future trials. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (No. NCT01053949).