Francesca Patriarca

Bortezomib-Melphalan-Prednisone-Thalidomide Followed by Maintenance With Bortezomib-Thalidomide Compared With Bortezomib-Melphalan-Prednisone for Initial Treatment of Multiple Myeloma: A Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE The combination of bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) is a new standard of care for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. This phase III study examined the efficacy of the four-drug combination of bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (VMPT) followed by maintenance with bortezomib-thalidomide (VMPT-VT) compared with VMP treatment alone in untreated multiple myeloma patients who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 511 patients were randomly assigned to receive nine cycles of VMPT followed by continuous VT as maintenance, or nine cycles of VMP at the same doses with no additional therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS The 3-year estimates of progression-free survival were 56% in patients receiving VMPT-VT and 41% in those receiving VMP (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.90; P = .008). At 3 years, the cumulative proportions of patients who did not go on to the next therapy were 72% with VMPT-VT and 60% with VMP (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.90; P = .007). Complete response rates were 38% in the VMPT-VT group and 24% in the VMP group (P < .001). The 3-year overall survival was 89% with VMPT-VT and 87% with VMP (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.53 to 1.60; P = .77). Grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (38% v 28%; P = .02), cardiologic events (10% v 5%; P = .04), and thromboembolic events (5% v 2%; P = .08) were more frequent among patients assigned to the VMPT-VT group than among those assigned to the VMP group; treatment-related deaths were 4% with VMPT-VT and 3% with VMP. CONCLUSION VMPT followed by VT as maintenance was superior to VMP alone in patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation.

Autologous transplantation and maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND This open-label, randomized, phase 3 study compared melphalan at a dose of 200 mg per square meter of body-surface area plus autologous stem-cell transplantation with melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) and compared lenalidomide maintenance therapy with no maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. METHODS We randomly assigned 273 patients 65 years of age or younger to high-dose melphalan plus stem-cell transplantation or MPR consolidation therapy after induction, and 251 patients to lenalidomide maintenance therapy or no maintenance therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS The median follow-up period was 51.2 months. Both progression-free and overall survival were significantly longer with high-dose melphalan plus stem-cell transplantation than with MPR (median progression-free survival, 43.0 months vs. 22.4 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32 to 0.61; P<0.001; and 4-year overall survival, 81.6% vs. 65.3%; hazard ratio for death, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.93; P=0.02). Median progression-free survival was significantly longer with lenalidomide maintenance than with no maintenance (41.9 months vs. 21.6 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.65; P<0.001), but 3-year overall survival was not significantly prolonged (88.0% vs. 79.2%; hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.15; P=0.14). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was significantly more frequent with high-dose melphalan than with MPR (94.3% vs. 51.5%), as were gastrointestinal adverse events (18.4% vs. 0%) and infections (16.3% vs. 0.8%); neutropenia and dermatologic toxic effects were more frequent with lenalidomide maintenance than with no maintenance (23.3% vs. 0% and 4.3% vs. 0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Consolidation therapy with high-dose melphalan plus stem-cell transplantation, as compared with MPR, significantly prolonged progression-free and overall survival among patients with multiple myeloma who were 65 years of age or younger. Lenalidomide maintenance, as compared with no maintenance, significantly prolonged progression-free survival. (Funded by Celgene; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00551928.).

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly bortezomib in multiple myeloma patients

In a recent phase 3 trial, bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide followed by maintenance treatment with bortezomib-thalidomide demonstrated superior efficacy compared with bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone. To decrease neurologic toxicities, the protocol was amended and patients in both arms received once-weekly instead of the initial twice-weekly bortezomib infusions: 372 patients received once-weekly and 139 twice-weekly bortezomib. In this post-hoc analysis we assessed the impact of the schedule change on clinical outcomes and safety. Long-term outcomes appeared similar: 3-year progression-free survival rate was 50% in the once-weekly and 47% in the twice-weekly group (P > .999), and 3-year overall survival rate was 88% and 89%, respectively (P = .54). The complete response rate was 30% in the once-weekly and 35% in the twice-weekly group (P = .27). Nonhematologic grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 35% of once-weekly patients and 51% of twice-weekly patients (P = .003). The incidence of grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy was 8% in the once-weekly and 28% in the twice-weekly group (P < .001); 5% of patients in the once-weekly and 15% in the twice-weekly group discontinued therapy because of peripheral neuropathy (P < .001). This improvement in safety did not appear to affect efficacy. This study is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01063179.

Prognostic relevance of 18-F FDG PET/CT in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients treated with up-front autologous transplantation

We prospectively analyzed the prognostic relevance of positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) at diagnosis, after thalidomide-dexamethasone (TD) induction therapy and double autotransplantation (ASCT) in 192 newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Presence at baseline of at least 3 focal lesions (FLs; 44% of cases), a standardized uptake value (SUV) > 4.2 (46%), and extramedullary disease (EMD; 6%) adversely affected 4-year estimates of progression-free survival (PFS; ≥ 3 FLs: 50%; SUV > 4.2: 43%; presence of EMD: 28%). SUV > 4.2 and EMD were also correlated with shorter overall survival (OS; 4-year rates: 77% and 66%, respectively). Persistence of SUV > 4.2 after TD induction was an early predictor for shorter PFS. Three months after ASCT, PET/CT was negative in 65% of patients whose 4-year rates of PFS and OS were superior to those of PET-positive patients (PFS: 66% and OS: 89%). In a multivariate analysis, both EMD and SUV > 4.2 at baseline and persistence of fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake after ASCT were independent variables adversely affecting PFS. PET/CT involvement at diagnosis, after novel agent-based induction and subsequent ASCT is a reliable predictor of prognosis in MM patients. This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NTC01341262.

Aspirin, Warfarin, or Enoxaparin Thromboprophylaxis in Patients With Multiple Myeloma Treated With Thalidomide: A Phase III, Open-Label, Randomized Trial

PURPOSE In patients with myeloma, thalidomide significantly improves outcomes but increases the risk of thromboembolic events. In this randomized, open-label, multicenter trial, we compared aspirin (ASA) or fixed low-dose warfarin (WAR) versus low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for preventing thromboembolism in patients with myeloma treated with thalidomide-based regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 667 patients with previously untreated myeloma who received thalidomide-containing regimens and had no clinical indication or contraindication for a specific antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy were randomly assigned to receive ASA (100 mg/d), WAR (1.25 mg/d), or LMWH (enoxaparin 40 mg/d). A composite primary end point included serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, or sudden deaths during the first 6 months of treatment. RESULTS Of 659 analyzed patients, 43 (6.5%) had serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, or sudden death during the first 6 months (6.4% in the ASA group, 8.2% in the WAR group, and 5.0% in the LMWH group). Compared with LMWH, the absolute differences were +1.3% (95% CI, -3.0% to 5.7%; P = .544) in the ASA group and +3.2% (95% CI, -1.5% to 7.8%; P = .183) in the WAR group. The risk of thromboembolism was 1.38 times higher in patients treated with thalidomide without bortezomib. Three major (0.5%) and 10 minor (1.5%) bleeding episodes were recorded. CONCLUSION In patients with myeloma treated with thalidomide-based regimens, ASA and WAR showed similar efficacy in reducing serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, and sudden deaths compared with LMWH, except in elderly patients where WAR showed less efficacy than LMWH.

Bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone is superior to thalidomide-dexamethasone as consolidation therapy after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

In a randomized, phase 3 study, superior complete/near-complete response (CR/nCR) rates and extended progression-free survival were demonstrated with bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) versus thalidomide-dexamethasone (TD) as induction therapy before, and consolidation after, double autologous stem cell transplantation for newly diagnosed myeloma patients (intention-to-treat analysis; VTD, n = 236; TD, n = 238). This per-protocol analysis (VTD, n = 160; TD, n = 161) specifically assessed the efficacy and safety of consolidation with VTD or TD. Before starting consolidation, CR/nCR rates were not significantly different in the VTD (63.1%) and TD arms (54.7%). After consolidation, CR (60.6% vs 46.6%) and CR/nCR (73.1% vs 60.9%) rates were significantly higher for VTD-treated versus TD-treated patients. VTD consolidation significantly increased CR and CR/nCR rates, but TD did not (McNemar test). With a median follow-up of 30.4 months from start of consolidation, 3-year progression-free survival was significantly longer for the VTD group (60% vs 48% for TD). Grade 2 or 3 peripheral neuropathy (8.1% vs 2.4%) was more frequent with VTD (grade 3, 0.6%) versus TD consolidation. The superior efficacy of VTD versus TD as induction was retained despite readministration as consolidation therapy after double autologous transplantation. VTD consolidation therapy significantly contributed to improved clinical outcomes observed for patients randomly assigned to the VTD arm of the study. The study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01134484.

Complete response correlates with long-term progression-free and overall survival in elderly myeloma treated with novel agents: analysis of 1175 patients.

Complete response (CR) was an uncommon event in elderly myeloma patients until novel agents were combined with standard oral melphalan-prednisone. This analysis assesses the impact of treatment response on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We retrospectively analyzed 1175 newly diagnosed myeloma patients, enrolled in 3 multicenter trials, treated with melphalan-prednisone alone (n = 332), melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (n = 332), melphalan-prednisone-bortezomib (n = 257), or melphalan-prednisone-bortezomib-thalidomide (n = 254). After a median follow-up of 29 months, the 3-year PFS and OS were 67% and 27% (hazard ratio = 0.16; P < .001), and 91% and 70% (hazard ratio = 0.15; P < .001) in patients who obtained CR and in those who achieved very good partial response, respectively. Similar results were observed in patients older than 75 years. Multivariate analysis confirmed that the achievement of CR was an independent predictor of longer PFS and OS, regardless of age, International Staging System stage, and treatment. These findings highlight a significant association between the achievement of CR and long-term outcome, and support the use of novel agents to achieve maximal response in elderly patients, including those more than 75 years. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00232934, #ISRCTN 90692740, and #NCT01063179.

Aspirin or enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide

Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is effective in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) but is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This prospective, open-label, randomized substudy of a phase 3 trial compared the efficacy and safety of thromboprophylaxis with low-dose aspirin (ASA) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with newly diagnosed MM, treated with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone induction and melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide consolidation. Overall, 342 patients who did not have clinical indications or contraindications to antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy were randomly assigned to receive ASA 100 mg/d (n = 176) or LMWH enoxaparin 40 mg/d (n = 166). The incidence of VTE was 2.27% in the ASA group and 1.20% in the LMWH group. Compared with LMWH, the absolute difference in the proportion of VTE was 1.07% (95% confidence interval, -1.69-3.83; P = .452) in the ASA group. Pulmonary embolism was observed in 1.70% of patients in the ASA group and none in the LMWH group. No arterial thrombosis, acute cardiovascular events, or sudden deaths were reported. No major hemorrhagic complications were reported. In previously untreated patients with MM receiving lenalidomide with a low thromboembolic risk, ASA could be an effective and less-expensive alternative to LMWH thromboprophylaxis.

Bortezomib As Induction Before Autologous Transplantation, Followed by Lenalidomide As Consolidation-Maintenance in Untreated Multiple Myeloma Patients

PURPOSE To evaluate the effect of bortezomib as induction therapy before autologous transplantation, followed by lenalidomide as consolidation-maintenance in myeloma patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Newly diagnosed patients age 65 to 75 years were eligible. Induction (bortezomib, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone [PAD]) included four 21-day cycles of bortezomib (1.3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11), pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (30 mg/m(2) on day 4), and dexamethasone (40 mg/d; cycle 1: days 1 to 4, 8 to 11, and 15 to 18; cycles 2 to 4: days 1 to 4). Autologous transplantation was tandem melphalan 100 mg/m(2) (MEL100) and stem-cell support. Consolidation included four 28-day cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg/d on days 1 to 21 every 28 days) plus prednisone (50 mg every other day), followed by maintenance with lenalidomide (LP-L; 10 mg/d on days 1 to 21) until relapse. Primary end points were safety (incidence of grade 3 to 4 adverse events [AEs]) and efficacy (response rate). Results A total of 102 patients were enrolled. In a per-protocol analysis, after PAD, 58% of patients had very good partial response (VGPR) or better, including 13% with complete response (CR); after MEL100, 82% of patients had at least VGPR and 38% had CR; and after LP-L, 86% of patients had at least VGPR and 66% had CR. After median follow-up time of 21 months, the 2-year progression-free survival rate was 69%, and the 2-year overall survival rate was 86%. During induction, treatment-related mortality was 3%; grade 3 to 4 AEs included thrombocytopenia (17%), neutropenia (10%), peripheral neuropathy (16%), and pneumonia (10%). During consolidation-maintenance, grade 3 to 4 AEs were neutropenia (16%), thrombocytopenia (6%), pneumonia (5%), and cutaneous rash (4%). CONCLUSION Bortezomib as induction before autologous transplantation, followed by lenalidomide as consolidation-maintenance, is an effective regimen.

Treatment of refractory chronic GVHD with rituximab: a GITMO study

The anti-CD20 chimaeric monoclonal antibody Rituximab has recently been shown to induce significant clinical response in a proportion of patients with refractory chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD). We now report 38 patients, median age 48 years (22–61), receiving Rituximab for refractory cGVHD, assessed for clinical response and survival. Median duration of cGVHD before Rituximab was 23 months (range 2–116), the median number of failed treatment lines was 3 (range 1 to ⩾6) and the median follow-up after Rituximab was 11 months (1–88). Overall response rate was 65%: skin 17/20 (63%), mouth 10/21 (48%), eyes 6/14 (43%), liver 3/12 (25%), lung 3/8 (37.5%), joints 4/5, gut 3/4, thrombocytopaenia 2/3, vagina 0/2, pure red cell aplasia 0/1 and, myasthenia gravis 1/1. During the study period 8/38 died: causes of death were cGVHD progression (n=3), disease relapse (n=1), infection (n=3), sudden death (n=1). The actuarial 2 year survival is currently 76%. We confirm that Rituximab is effective in over 50% of patients with refractory cGVHD and may have a beneficial impact on survival.