Mariella Grasso

Oral melphalan and prednisone chemotherapy plus thalidomide compared with melphalan and prednisone alone in elderly patients with multiple myeloma: randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Since 1960, oral melphalan and prednisone (MP) has been regarded as the standard of care in elderly multiple myeloma patients. This multicentre randomised trial compared oral MP plus thalidomide (MPT) with MP alone in patients aged 60-85 years. METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were randomly assigned to receive oral MP for six 4-week cycles plus thalidomide (n=129; 100 mg per day continuously until any sign of relapse or progressive disease) or MP alone (n=126). Analysis was intention-to-treat. This study is registered at , number NCT00232934. RESULTS Patients treated with thalidomide had higher response rates and longer event-free survival (primary endpoints) than patients who were not. Combined complete or partial response rates were 76.0% for MPT and 47.6% for MP alone (absolute difference 28.3%, 95% CI 16.5-39.1), and the near-complete or complete response rates were 27.9% and 7.2%, respectively. 2-year event-free survival rates were 54% for MPT and 27% for MP (hazard ratio [HR] for MPT 0.51, 95% CI 0.35-0.75, p=0.0006). 3-year survival rates were 80% for MPT and 64% for MP (HR for MPT 0.68, 95% CI 0.38-1.22, p=0.19). Rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events were 48% in MPT patients and 25% in MP patients (p=0.0002). Introduction of enoxaparin prophylaxis reduced rate of thromboembolism from 20% to 3% (p=0.005). CONCLUSION Oral MPT is an effective first-line treatment for elderly patients with multiple myeloma. Anticoagulant prophylaxis reduces frequency of thrombosis. Longer follow-up is needed to assess effect on overall survival.

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.

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.

Major Tumor Shrinking and Persistent Molecular Remissions After Consolidation With Bortezomib, Thalidomide, and Dexamethasone in Patients With Autografted Myeloma

PURPOSE We investigated the effect on minimal residual disease, by qualitative and real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR), of a consolidation regimen that included bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTD) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) responding to autologous stem-cell transplantation (auto-SCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients achieving at least very good partial response who had an available molecular marker based on the immunoglobulin heavy-chain rearrangement received four courses of treatment every month: four infusions per month of bortezomib at 1.6 mg/m(2), thalidomide at 200 mg/d, and dexamethasone at 20 mg/d on days 1 to 4, 8 to 11, and 15 to 18. Patients were studied with tumor-clone-specific primers by qualitative nested PCR and RQ-PCR. Results Of 39 patients enrolled, 31 received the four VTD courses. Immunofixation complete responses increased from 15% after auto-SCT to 49% after VTD. Molecular remissions (MRs) were 3% after auto-SCT and 18% after VTD. Median time to maximum response was 3.5 months. So far, no patient in MR has relapsed (median follow-up, 42 months). VTD consolidation induced an additional depletion of 4.14 natural logarithms of tumor burden by RQ-PCR. Patients with a tumor load less than the median value after VTD had outcomes better than those who had tumor loads above the median value after VTD (at median follow-up: progression-free survival, 100% v 57%; P < .001). CONCLUSION To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to document the occurrence of persistent MRs in a proportion of MM patients treated without allogeneic transplantation. Moreover, the major reduction in tumor load recorded by RQ-PCR after VTD suggests that unprecedented levels of tumor cell reduction can be achieved in MM thanks to the new nonchemotherapeutic drugs.

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.

Bortezomib-Melphalan-Prednisone-Thalidomide Followed by Maintenance With Bortezomib-Thalidomide Compared With Bortezomib-Melphalan-Prednisone for Initial Treatment of Multiple Myeloma: Updated Follow-Up and Improved Survival

PURPOSE Bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) has improved overall survival in multiple myeloma. This randomized trial compared VMP plus thalidomide (VMPT) induction followed by bortezomib-thalidomide maintenance (VMPT-VT) with VMP in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS We randomly assigned 511 patients who were not eligible for transplantation to receive VMPT-VT (nine 5-week cycles of VMPT followed by 2 years of VT maintenance) or VMP (nine 5-week cycles without maintenance). RESULTS In the initial analysis with a median follow-up of 23 months, VMPT-VT improved complete response rate from 24% to 38% and 3-year progression-free-survival (PFS) from 41% to 56% compared with VMP. In this analysis, median follow-up was 54 months. The median PFS was significantly longer with VMPT-VT (35.3 months) than with VMP (24.8 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; P < .001). The time to next therapy was 46.6 months in the VMPT-VT group and 27.8 months in the VMP group (HR, 0.52; P < .001). The 5-year overall survival (OS) was greater with VMPT-VT (61%) than with VMP (51%; HR, 0.70; P = .01). Survival from relapse was identical in both groups (HR, 0.92; P = .63). In the VMPT-VT group, the most frequent grade 3 to 4 adverse events included neutropenia (38%), thrombocytopenia (22%), peripheral neuropathy (11%), and cardiologic events (11%). All of these, except for thrombocytopenia, were significantly more frequent in the VMPT-VT patients. CONCLUSION Bortezomib and thalidomide significantly improved OS in multiple myeloma patients not eligible for transplantation.

Oral melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide for newly diagnosed patients with myeloma

Thalidomide is an immunomodulatory drug with strong antimyeloma activity. It is an effective treatment for multiple myeloma at disease recurrence and at diagnosis, both as a single agent and in combination with steroids or chemotherapy. No data are available on the association of thalidomide with oral melphalan and prednisone, still considered the standard treatment for elderly patients.

Melphalan 200 mg/m 2 versus melphalan 100 mg/m 2 in newly diagnosed myeloma patients: a prospective, multicenter phase 3 study

High-dose (200 mg/m(2), MEL200) and intermediate-dose melphalan (100 mg/m(2), MEL100) showed significant activity in myeloma. In a phase 3 study, 298 patients were randomly assigned to receive 2 autologous transplantations after conditioning with MEL200 or MEL100. Ninety-six of 149 (64%) completed MEL200 and 103 of 149 (69%) MEL100. Best response to MEL200 was: complete remission 22 of 149 (15%); partial remission 95 of 149 (64%), for an overall response rate of 79%. Best response to MEL100 was: complete remission 12 of 149 (8%); partial remission 95 of 149 (64%), for an overall response rate of 72%. Overall survival did not differ (P = .13); median progression-free survival (31.4 vs 26.2 months, P = .01), median time to progression (34.4 vs 27.0 months, P = .014) were longer in the MEL200. Treatment-related mortality was 3.1% in the MEL200 and 2.9% in the MEL100 group. Severe neutropenia and infections were marginally superior, whereas severe thrombocytopenia, mucositis, gastrointestinal adverse events, and the overall occurrence of at least 1 nonhematologic grade 3 or 4 adverse event were significantly higher in the MEL200 cohort. We conclude that MEL200 leads to longer remission duration and should be considered the standard conditioning regimen for autologous transplantation. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00950768.

Long-term results of the GIMEMA VEL-03-096 trial in MM patients receiving VTD consolidation after ASCT: MRD kinetics' impact on survival

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based minimal residual disease (MRD) analysis is a useful prognostic tool in multiple myeloma (MM), although its long-term impact still needs to be addressed. This report presents the updated results of the GIMEMA-VEL-03-096 trial. Thirty-nine MM patients receiving bortezomib–thalidomide–dexamethasone after autologous transplantation were monitored for MRD by both nested and real-time quantitative-PCR until relapse. Our data confirm the strong impact of MRD on survival: overall survival was 72% at 8 years median follow-up for patients in major MRD response versus 48% for those experiencing MRD persistence (P=0.041). In addition, MRD kinetics resulted predictive for relapse: indeed median remission duration was not reached for patients in major MRD response, 38 months for those experiencing MRD reappearance and 9 months for patients with MRD persistence (P<0.001). Moreover: (1) 26 patients achieving major MRD response (67%) benefit of excellent disease control (median TNT: 42 months); (2) MRD reappearance heralds relapse, with a TNT comparable to that of MRD persistence (9 versus 10 months, P=0.706); (3) the median lag between MRD reappearance and need for salvage treatment is 9 months. These results suggest the usefulness of a long-term MRD monitoring in MM patients and the need for maintenance or pre-emptive treatments ensuring durable responses.

Revisiting the prognostic role of gallium scintigraphy in low-grade Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma

Abstract. The purpose of this study was threefold: to evaluate the role of gallium-67 scintigraphy in the staging of low-grade non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas (LGNHL), to assess the relationship between the expression of CD71 on the surface of the neoplastic cells and the 67Ga uptake by the tumour, and to establish the contribution of 67Ga scan in defining the prognosis of LGNHL. Forty-eight patients with untreated LGNHL diagnosed in a single institution over a decade were reviewed. The end point of the study was survival of the patients according to the scintigraphic 67Ga score at diagnosis. In addition to 67Ga scan, other prognostic variables were studied, relating to the neoplastic burden, the biology of the tumour and the host. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used. 67Ga scan identified only 116/286 (41%) nodes involved by lymphoma that were detected by clinical examination or computed tomography scan. A scintigraphic scoring system with an arbitrary cut-off value of 3 (high scan score) was able to predict patients with a dismal prognosis: with a mean follow-up of 47 months (range: 1–146 months) the median survival time was 28 months in patients with a high scan score and 74 months in patients with a low scan score (P=0.002). CD71 values were 27.4%±14.9% (mean ±SD) in the former and 8.9%±7.2% in the latter (P=0.0001). Only performance status and extranodal sites were significant variables for prognosis in multivariate analysis. It is concluded that 67Ga scan is inaccurate in staging but might be very important in defining the prognosis in LGNHL, in association with other prognostic variables.