J. Bladé

Prevention of thalidomide- and lenalidomide-associated thrombosis in myeloma

The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is more than 1‰ annually in the general population and increases further in cancer patients. The risk of VTE is higher in multiple myeloma (MM) patients who receive thalidomide or lenalidomide, especially in combination with dexamethasone or chemotherapy. Various VTE prophylaxis strategies, such as low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), warfarin or aspirin, have been investigated in small, uncontrolled clinical studies. This manuscript summarizes the available evidence and recommends a prophylaxis strategy according to a risk-assessment model. Individual risk factors for thrombosis associated with thalidomide/lenalidomide-based therapy include age, history of VTE, central venous catheter, comorbidities (infections, diabetes, cardiac disease), immobilization, surgery and inherited thrombophilia. Myeloma-related risk factors include diagnosis and hyperviscosity. VTE is very high in patients who receive high-dose dexamethasone, doxorubicin or multiagent chemotherapy in combination with thalidomide or lenalidomide, but not with bortezomib. The panel recommends aspirin for patients with ⩽1 risk factor for VTE. LMWH (equivalent to enoxaparin 40 mg per day) is recommended for those with two or more individual/myeloma-related risk factors. LMWH is also recommended for all patients receiving concurrent high-dose dexamethasone or doxorubicin. Full-dose warfarin targeting a therapeutic INR of 2–3 is an alternative to LMWH, although there are limited data in the literature with this strategy. In the absence of clear data from randomized studies as a foundation for recommendations, many of the following proposed strategies are the results of common sense or derive from the extrapolation of data from many studies not specifically designed to answer these questions. Further investigation is needed to define the best VTE prophylaxis.

International Myeloma Working Group guidelines for serum-free light chain analysis in multiple myeloma and related disorders

The serum immunoglobulin-free light chain (FLC) assay measures levels of free κ and λ immunoglobulin light chains. There are three major indications for the FLC assay in the evaluation and management of multiple myeloma and related plasma cell disorders (PCD). In the context of screening, the serum FLC assay in combination with serum protein electrophoresis (PEL) and immunofixation yields high sensitivity, and negates the need for 24-h urine studies for diagnoses other than light chain amyloidosis (AL). Second, the baseline FLC measurement is of major prognostic value in virtually every PCD. Third, the FLC assay allows for quantitative monitoring of patients with oligosecretory PCD, including AL, oligosecretory myeloma and nearly two-thirds of patients who had previously been deemed to have non-secretory myeloma. In AL patients, serial FLC measurements outperform PEL and immunofixation. In oligosecretory myeloma patients, although not formally validated, serial FLC measurements reduce the need for frequent bone marrow biopsies. In contrast, there are no data to support using FLC assay in place of 24-h urine PEL for monitoring or for serial measurements in PCD with measurable disease by serum or urine PEL. This paper provides consensus guidelines for the use of this important assay, in the diagnosis and management of clonal PCD.

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.

Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma: IMWG consensus perspectives risk factors for progression and guidelines for monitoring and management

Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) was identified in 3.2% of 21 463 residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota, 50 years of age or older. The risk of progression to multiple myeloma, Waldenstroms macroglobulinemia, AL amyloidosis or a lymphoproliferative disorder is approximately 1% per year. Low-risk MGUS is characterized by having an M protein <15 g/l, IgG type and a normal free light chain (FLC) ratio. Patients should be followed with serum protein electrophoresis at six months and, if stable, can be followed every 2–3 years or when symptoms suggestive of a plasma cell malignancy arise. Patients with intermediate and high-risk MGUS should be followed in 6 months and then annually for life. The risk of smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma (SMM) progressing to multiple myeloma or a related disorder is 10% per year for the first 5 years, 3% per year for the next 5 years and 1–2% per year for the next 10 years. Testing should be done 2–3 months after the initial recognition of SMM. If the results are stable, the patient should be followed every 4–6 months for 1 year and, if stable, every 6–12 months.

The use of bisphosphonates in multiple myeloma: recommendations of an expert panel on behalf of the European Myeloma Network

BACKGROUND Bisphosphonates (BPs) prevent, reduce, and delay multiple myeloma (MM)-related skeletal complications. Intravenous pamidronate and zoledronic acid, and oral clodronate are used for the management of MM bone disease. The purpose of this paper is to review the current evidence for the use of BPs in MM and provide European Union-specific recommendations to support the clinical practice of treating myeloma bone disease. DESIGN AND METHODS An interdisciplinary, expert panel of specialists on MM and myeloma-related bone disease convened for a face-to-face meeting to review and assess the evidence and develop the recommendations. The panel reviewed and graded the evidence available from randomized clinical trials, clinical practice guidelines, and the body of published literature. Where published data were weak or unavailable, the panel used their own clinical experience to put forward recommendations based solely on their expert opinions. RESULTS The panel recommends the use of BPs in MM patients suffering from lytic bone disease or severe osteoporosis. Intravenous administration may be preferable; however, oral administration can be considered for patients unable to make hospital visits. Dosing should follow approved indications with adjustments if necessary. In general, BPs are well tolerated, but preventive steps should be taken to avoid renal impairment and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). The panel agrees that BPs should be given for 2 years, but this may be extended if there is evidence of active myeloma bone disease. Initial therapy of ONJ should include discontinuation of BPs until healing occurs. BPs should be restarted if there is disease progression. CONCLUSIONS BPs are an essential component of MM therapy for minimizing skeletal morbidity. Recent retrospective data indicate that a modified dosing regimen and preventive measures can greatly reduce the incidence of ONJ.

Pathogenesis and treatment of renal failure in multiple myeloma

Renal failure is a frequent complication in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) that causes significant morbidity. In the majority of cases, renal impairment is caused by the accumulation and precipitation of light chains, which form casts in the distal tubules, resulting in renal obstruction. In addition, myeloma light chains are also directly toxic on proximal renal tubules, further adding to renal dysfunction. Adequate hydration, correction of hypercalcemia and hyperuricemia and antimyeloma therapy should be initiated promptly. Recovery of renal function has been reported in a significant proportion of patients treated with conventional chemotherapy, especially when high-dose dexamethasone is also used. Severe renal impairment and large amount of proteinuria are associated with a lower probability of renal recovery. Novel agents, such as thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide, have significant activity in pretreated and untreated MM patients. Although there is limited experience with thalidomide and lenalidomide in patients with renal failure, data suggest that bortezomib may be beneficial in this population. Clinical studies that have included newly diagnosed and refractory patients indicate that bortezomib-based regimens may result in rapid reversal of renal failure in up to 50% of patients and that full doses of bortezomib can be administered without additional toxicity.

Efficacy and safety of bortezomib in patients with renal impairment: results from the APEX phase 3 study

Renal impairment is associated with poor prognosis in multiple myeloma (MM). This subgroup analysis of the phase 3 Assessment of Proteasome Inhibition for Extending Remissions (APEX) study of bortezomib vs high-dose dexamethasone assessed efficacy and safety in patients with relapsed MM with varying degrees of renal impairment (creatinine clearance (CrCl) <30, 30–50, 51–80 and >80 ml min−1). Time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS) and safety were compared between subgroups with CrCl ⩽50 ml min−1 (severe-to-moderate) and >50 ml min−1 (no/mild impairment). Response rates with bortezomib were similar (36–47%) and time to response rapid (0.7–1.6 months) across subgroups. Although the trend was toward shorter TTP/OS in bortezomib patients with severe-to-moderate vs no/mild impairment, differences were not significant. OS was significantly shorter in dexamethasone patients with CrCl ⩽50 vs >50 ml min−1 (P=0.003), indicating that bortezomib is more effective than dexamethasone in overcoming the detrimental effect of renal impairment. Safety profile of bortezomib was comparable between subgroups. With dexamethasone, grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs), serious AEs and discontinuations for AEs were significantly elevated in patients with CrCl ⩽50 vs >50 ml min−1. These results indicate that bortezomib is active and well tolerated in patients with relapsed MM with varying degrees of renal insufficiency. Efficacy/safety were not substantially affected by severe-to-moderate vs no/mild impairment.

International myeloma working group (IMWG) consensus statement and guidelines regarding the current status of stem cell collection and high-dose therapy for multiple myeloma and the role of plerixafor (AMD 3100).

Multiple myeloma is the most common indication for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell support (ASCT) in North America today. Stem cell procurement for ASCT has most commonly been performed with stem cell mobilization using colony-stimulating factors with or without prior chemotherapy. The target CD34+ cell dose to be collected as well as the number of apheresis performed varies throughout the country, but a minimum of 2 million CD34+ cells/kg has been traditionally used for the support of one cycle of high-dose therapy. With the advent of plerixafor (AMD3100) (a novel stem cell mobilization agent), it is pertinent to review the current status of stem cell mobilization for myeloma as well as the role of autologous stem cell transplantation in this disease. On June 1, 2008, a panel of experts was convened by the International Myeloma Foundation to address issues regarding stem cell mobilization and autologous transplantation in myeloma in the context of new therapies. The panel was asked to discuss a variety of issues regarding stem cell collection and transplantation in myeloma especially with the arrival of plerixafor. Herein, is a summary of their deliberations and conclusions.

Management of treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy in multiple myeloma

Peripheral neuropathy (PN) is one of the most important complications of multiple myeloma (MM) treatment. PN can be caused by MM itself, either by the effects of the monoclonal protein or in the form of radiculopathy from direct compression, and particularly by certain therapies, including bortezomib, thalidomide, vinca alkaloids and cisplatin. Clinical evaluation has shown that up to 20% of MM patients have PN at diagnosis and as many as 75% may experience treatment-emergent PN during therapy. The incidence, symptoms, reversibility, predisposing factors and etiology of treatment-emergent PN vary among MM therapies, with PN incidence also affected by the dose, schedule and combinations of potentially neurotoxic agents. Effective management of treatment-emergent PN is critical to minimize the incidence and severity of this complication, while maintaining therapeutic efficacy. Herein, the state of knowledge regarding treatment-emergent PN in MM patients and current management practices are outlined, and recommendations regarding optimal strategies for PN management during MM treatment are provided. These strategies include early and regular monitoring with neurological evaluation, with dose modification and treatment discontinuation as indicated. Areas requiring further research include the development of MM-specific, patient-focused assessment tools, pharmacogenomic analysis of patient DNA, and trials to assess the efficacy of pharmacological interventions.

Plasma cell leukemia: consensus statement on diagnostic requirements, response criteria and treatment recommendations by the International Myeloma Working Group

Plasma cell leukemia (PCL) is a rare and aggressive variant of myeloma characterized by the presence of circulating plasma cells. It is classified as either primary PCL occurring at diagnosis or as secondary PCL in patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma. Primary PCL is a distinct clinic-pathological entity with different cytogenetic and molecular findings. The clinical course is aggressive with short remissions and survival duration. The diagnosis is based upon the percentage (⩾20%) and absolute number (⩾2 × 109/l) of plasma cells in the peripheral blood. It is proposed that the thresholds for diagnosis be re-examined and consensus recommendations are made for diagnosis, as well as, response and progression criteria. Induction therapy needs to begin promptly and have high clinical activity leading to rapid disease control in an effort to minimize the risk of early death. Intensive chemotherapy regimens and bortezomib-based regimens are recommended followed by high-dose therapy with autologous stem cell transplantation if feasible. Allogeneic transplantation can be considered in younger patients. Prospective multicenter studies are required to provide revised definitions and better understanding of the pathogenesis of PCL.