New drugs in multiple myeloma: mechanisms of action and phase I/II clinical findings

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 1157-1165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique M Ocio ◽  
María-Victoria Mateos ◽  
Patricia Maiso ◽  
Atanasio Pandiella ◽  
Jesús F San-Miguel
Leukemia ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 525-542 ◽  
Author(s):  
E M Ocio ◽  
◽  
P G Richardson ◽  
S V Rajkumar ◽  
A Palumbo ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19537-e19537
Author(s):  
Udhayvir Singh Grewal ◽  
Rajshekhar Chakraborty ◽  
Fazal I Raziq ◽  
Afia Ashraf ◽  
Ammara Majeed ◽  
...  

e19537 Background: To improve outcomes, multiple agents with varied mechanisms of action targeting different multiple myeloma (MM) clones are needed. Methods: Systematic review of ongoing phase I-III clinical trials in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) was performed, (PRISMA guidelines) using 5 databases. Results: 8 trials n = 1,990 patients included (Table 1). We evaluated the efficacy of following four drug combinations Isatuximab (Isa), bortezomib (V), lenalidomide (R)dexamethasone (d) (Isa-VRd) Daratumumab (Dara) plus V, Melphalan (M) and Prednisone (P) (Dara-VMP) vs VMP Dara-VRd vs VRd Carfilzomib (K), Cyclophosphamide (C), R, Dexamethasone (KCRD) vs an immunomodulatory agent containing triplet (CTD/CRD) Dara with Ixazomib (I), R,d (Dara- IRd) Dara, Cyclophosphamide (Cy), V,d (Dara-CyBord) Elotuzumab (Elo) VRd Dara with K,R,d (Dara- KRd) For transplant-eligible patients, Dara-VRd demonstrated the best treatment response (VGPR = 100%, CR rate = 63% and 15 months PFS = 94%). Dara-VMP (ORR = 90.9%,VGPR+ = 72.9%, mPFS at 27. 8 m = NR) and Isa+VRd (ORR = 93%, VGPR = 71.43%, 7.5 m PFS = 100%) were associated with improvement in OR in transplant ineligible patients. Dara-KRd showed excellent efficacy (ORR = 100%, ≥VGPR = 86%) with 100% 6 m PFS. Conclusions: Four-drug regimens have improved efficacy (higher ORR, deeper response, higher proportion of MRD negativity and higher ≥VGPR responses) compared to three-drug regimens in NDMM, with a comparable incidence of toxicities. Longer follow-up is needed. [Table: see text]


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola Sgherza ◽  
Paola Curci ◽  
Rita Rizzi ◽  
Pellegrino Musto

Although the survival rate of patients with multiple myeloma has significantly improved in the last years thanks to the introduction of various classes of new drugs, such as proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, and monoclonal antibodies, the vast majority of these subjects relapse with a more aggressive disease due to the acquisition of further genetic alterations that may cause resistance to current salvage therapies. The treatment of these often “triple” (or even more) refractory patients remains challenging, and alternative approaches are required to overcome the onset of that resistance. Immunotherapies with novel monoclonal, drug-conjugated, or bi-specific antibodies, as well as the use of chimeric antigen receptor T cells, have been recently developed and are currently investigated. However, other non-immunologic therapeutic regimens based on melfluflen, venetoclax, or selinexor, three molecules with new mechanisms of action, have also shown promising results in the setting of relapsed/refractory myeloma. Here we report the most recent literature data regarding these three drugs, focusing on their efficacy and safety in multiple myeloma.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 3019-3019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Massimo Offidani ◽  
Federica Cavallo ◽  
Claudia Polloni ◽  
Anna Marina Liberati ◽  
Stelvio Ballanti ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3019 Background: Panobinostat (LBH-589) is a pan-deacetilase inhibitor that targets histone proteins increasing tumor suppressor gene activities leading to cell-cycle and differentiation arrest besides to target non-histone proteins such as HSP90, aggressomes, p53, HIF-1a, and a-tubulin somehow promoting cell death. Panobinostat, combined with steroids and/or immunomodulatory drugs, demonstrated additive/synergistic activity in Multiple Myeloma (MM) and ability to overcome previous chemoresistance. Several combination studies with Panobinostat plus novel drugs are now ongoing in MM. Methods: This is a multicenter, open-label, phase I-II study exploring the combination of a standard therapy such as MPT (Melphalan 0.18 mg/kg per os for 4 days, Prednisone 1.5 mg/kg per os for 4 days, Thalidomide 50 mg/day continuously) with Panobinostat 15 mg p.o. thrice weekly for 3 weeks in a 28-day cycle to assess safety profile and activity of this combination in patients with relapsed/refractory MM having adequate performance status and haematological, cardiac, liver and neurological functions. The study was designed according to the Briant and Day method that plans a “dose-escalation phase” to determine both the MTD and the activity of the study drug and an “expansion-phase” in which the MTD of the study drug is used to further assess its safety and efficacy. Despite in the first phase of this study 19 patients were planned according to the study design, protocol was amended after 13 patients had been enrolled since more than 50% grade 3–4 toxicity occurred although response criteria were met. Therefore, Panobinostat was reduced to 10 mg p.o. thrice weekly for 3 weeks in a 28-day cycle whereas the dose of drugs of the MPT combination was not modified. Toxicity and response were assessed according to CTC version 4 and IMWG criteria, respectively. Results: As of February 2010, 24 patients were enrolled in this study. Median age was 71.5 years (range 40–81 years) and 12 patients (50%) had ISS 2–3 score. Patients had received a median of 2 prior therapies (range 1–6) and 5 (21%) three or more prior lines of therapy. Sixteen (73%), 13 (54%), 18 (75%), 11 (46%) and 9 (37.5%) patients had been previously treated with ASCT, thalidomide, bortezomib, lenalidomide and all 3 new-drugs, respectively. Seven patients (29%) were refractory to the last therapy. Twelve patients (50%) had a disease history longer than 5 years. In the first 13 patients treated with Panobinostat 15 mg, grade 3–4 thrombocytopenia and neutropenia occurred in 6 (46%) and 9 patients (69%), respectively. Moreover, 4 patients (31%) developed non-hematological adverse events such as fatigue, constipation, infection and arrythmia. In the group of 11 patients treated with Panobinostat 10 mg, grade 3–4 thrombocytopenia decreased to 18% (2 patients) but neutropenia was still high (8 patients: 72.5%). Three patients (27%) had grade 3–4 non-hematological toxicity (one fatigue and two constipation). No patients had QTcF prolongation or severe neuropathy. Dose adjustment was necessary in 9 patients (37.5%, all due to hematological toxicity) while 6 patients (25%) interrupted the protocol because of side effects (5 due to no resolution of grade 3–4 hematological toxicity within 4 weeks and one due to atrial fibrillation). One patient (4%) died on study due to sepsis during prolonged neutropenia. Response ≥ PR were observed in 12 patients (50%) including 4 VGPR and 8 PR. Additionally, 2 patients had MR and 8 SD. Only 2 patients progressed during treatment. There was no difference between the two cohorts of patients (Panobinostat 15 mg and Panobinostat 10 mg) in terms of response ≥ PR (54% vs 45.5%) or disease progression (7.5% vs 9%). Notably, response was obtained also in 2/7 patients (28%) who progressed during bortezomib or IMIDs. Conclusions: This study suggests that MPT-Panobinostat combination has an encouraging anti-myeloma activity since responses were still seen in patients with advanced stage or resistant to new drugs diseases. Different schedules of Panobinostat/melphalan should be explored to reduce haematological toxicity. Disclosures: Offidani: Celgene: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Panobinostat in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Cavallo:Celgene: Honoraria. Polloni:Celgene: Honoraria. Ballanti:Celgene: Honoraria. Catarini:Celgene: Honoraria. Alesiani:Celgene: Honoraria. Corvatta:Celgene: Honoraria. Gentili:Celgene: Honoraria. Boccadoro:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Leoni:Celgene: Honoraria. Palumbo:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.


2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (16) ◽  
pp. 2761-2766 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesús San-Miguel ◽  
Jean-Luc Harousseau ◽  
Douglas Joshua ◽  
Kenneth C. Anderson

Progress in the understanding of multiple myeloma (MM) cell biology has led to the identification of new relevant prognostic factors and subsequently different risk groups. This concept, together with the recent discovery of new drugs with novel mechanisms of action, will probably lead to individualized treatment according to the different patients’ characteristics. In this review, we focus on current available agents already approved for MM, and discuss individualized treatment approaches for both transplantation candidates (subdivided into standard and high-risk patients) and elderly patients. Future progress in MM will be based on using science to inform the design of the optimal combined treatments, and high throughput assays that can assess the ability of combination therapies to induce death of MM cells, both alone and in the bone marrow microenvironment.


2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 120-124
Author(s):  
Dominik Dytfeld

AbstractIn spite of the introduction of several new drugs in the last 10 years, multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable. Thus, an adoptive cellular therapy using chimeric antigen receptor T (CART), a strategy to increase the frequency of tumor-directed and functionally active T cells targeting antigens present on the cancer cell, might change the treatment in MM as it did in lymphoma and ALL. There are several targets for CART therapy in MM on different levels of development, which are discussed in the manuscript. B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) being tested in the studies of phase 1–2 is the most promising, but so far CART has not been approved in the cure of MM and remains an experimental approach. The hematological society is facing a new technology which with its potential ability to cure MM, in spite of its complexity, cost, and toxicity, will definitely and soon change the landscape of myeloma in Europe and world-wide.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (14) ◽  
pp. 1264-1273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Casciaro ◽  
Floriana Cappiello ◽  
Walter Verrusio ◽  
Mauro Cacciafesta ◽  
Maria Luisa Mangoni

The frequent occurrence of multidrug-resistant strains to conventional antimicrobials has led to a clear decline in antibiotic therapies. Therefore, new molecules with different mechanisms of action are extremely necessary. Due to their unique properties, antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) represent a valid alternative to conventional antibiotics and many of them have been characterized for their activity and cytotoxicity. However, the effects that these peptides cause at concentrations below the minimum growth inhibitory concentration (MIC) have yet to be fully analyzed along with the underlying molecular mechanism. In this mini-review, the ability of AMPs to synergize with different antibiotic classes or different natural compounds is examined. Furthermore, data on microbial resistance induction are reported to highlight the importance of antibiotic resistance in the fight against infections. Finally, the effects that sub-MIC levels of AMPs can have on the bacterial pathogenicity are summarized while showing how signaling pathways can be valid therapeutic targets for the treatment of infectious diseases. All these aspects support the high potential of AMPs as lead compounds for the development of new drugs with antibacterial and immunomodulatory activities.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
pp. 6115
Author(s):  
Boris Mravec

Research on the neurobiology of cancer, which lies at the border of neuroscience and oncology, has elucidated the mechanisms and pathways that enable the nervous system to modulate processes associated with cancer initiation and progression. This research has also shown that several drugs which modulate interactions between the nervous system and the tumor micro- and macroenvironments significantly reduced the progression of cancer in animal models. Encouraging results were also provided by prospective clinical trials investigating the effect of drugs that reduce adrenergic signaling on the course of cancer in oncological patients. Moreover, it has been shown that reducing adrenergic signaling might also reduce the incidence of cancer in animal models, as well as in humans. However, even if many experimental and clinical findings have confirmed the preventive and therapeutic potential of drugs that reduce the stimulatory effect of the nervous system on processes related to cancer initiation and progression, several questions remain unanswered. Therefore, the aim of this review is to critically evaluate the efficiency of these drugs and to discuss questions that need to be answered before their introduction into conventional cancer treatment and prevention.


2021 ◽  
pp. 026988112110324
Author(s):  
David J Heal ◽  
Sharon L Smith

Background: Binge-eating disorder (BED) is a common psychiatric condition with adverse psychological and metabolic consequences. Lisdexamfetamine (LDX) is the only approved BED drug treatment. New drugs to treat BED are urgently needed. Methods: A comprehensive review of published psychopathological, pharmacological and clinical findings. Results: The evidence supports the hypothesis that BED is an impulse control disorder with similarities to ADHD, including responsiveness to catecholaminergic drugs, for example LDX and dasotraline. The target product profile (TPP) of the ideal BED drug combines treating the psychopathological drivers of the disorder with an independent weight-loss effect. Drugs with proven efficacy in BED have a common pharmacology; they potentiate central noradrenergic and dopaminergic neurotransmission. Because of the overlap between pharmacotherapy in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and BED, drug-candidates from diverse pharmacological classes, which have already failed in ADHD would also be predicted to fail if tested in BED. The failure in BED trials of drugs with diverse pharmacological mechanisms indicates many possible avenues for drug discovery can probably be discounted. Conclusions: (1) The efficacy of drugs for BED is dependent on reducing its core psychopathologies of impulsivity, compulsivity and perseveration and by increasing cognitive control of eating. (2) The analysis revealed a large number of pharmacological mechanisms are unlikely to be productive in the search for effective new BED drugs. (3) The most promising areas for new treatments for BED are drugs, which augment noradrenergic and dopaminergic neurotransmission and/or those which are effective in ADHD.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document