Daratumumab added to standard of care in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: A network meta‐analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 103 (6) ◽  
pp. 542-551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenjun Xu ◽  
DianFang Li ◽  
Yanhua Sun ◽  
Xuehong Ran ◽  
Baohong Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Newly Diagnosed

scholarly journals Impact of post-ASCT maintenance therapy on outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in Connect MM

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (13) ◽  
pp. 1608-1615 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
Rafat Abonour ◽  
Brian G. M. Durie ◽  
Mohit Narang ◽  
Howard R. Terebelo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Second Primary ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Using Data

Abstract Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) followed by lenalidomide maintenance therapy is the standard of care for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Clinical trials show progression-free survival (PFS) benefits, with some studies (Cancer and Leukemia Group [CALGB] trial and meta-analysis) also showing overall survival (OS) benefits, but applicability to real-world clinical settings is unclear. Using data from Connect MM, the largest US-based observational registry of NDMM patients, we analyzed effects of maintenance therapy on long-term outcomes in 1450 treated patients enrolled from 2009 to 2011. Patients who received induction therapy and ASCT (n = 432) were analyzed from 100 days post-ASCT (data cut 7 January 2016): 267 received maintenance (80% lenalidomide-based [of whom 88% received lenalidomide monotherapy]); 165 did not. Lenalidomide maintenance improved median PFS and 3-year PFS rate vs no maintenance (50.3 vs 30.8 months [hazard ratio (HR), 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46-0.82; P < .001] and 56% vs 42%, respectively). Improvements in median OS and 3-year OS rate were associated with lenalidomide maintenance vs no maintenance (not reached in either group [HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.83; P = .005] and 85% vs 70%, respectively). Five hematologic serious adverse events were reported with lenalidomide maintenance (pancytopenia [n = 2], febrile neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia [n = 1 each]) and 1 with no maintenance (thrombocytopenia). Second primary malignancies occurred at rates of 1.38 and 2.19 events per patient-year in lenalidomide maintenance and no maintenance groups, respectively. Survival benefits associated with lenalidomide maintenance previously demonstrated in clinical trials were observed in this community-based Connect MM Registry.

scholarly journals Safety and Efficacy of Four Drug Versus Three Drug Regimens Among Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3-3
Author(s):  
Saad Ullah Malik ◽  
Nazma Hanif ◽  
Priyanka Kumari ◽  
Khadija Noor Sami ◽  
Chase Warner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Drug Regimen ◽  
P Value ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Drug Regimens ◽  
Grade 3

Introduction: During recent years there has been a boom in the availability of treatments for multiple myeloma (MM). Based on the status of disease (newly diagnosed or relapsed/refractory), several regimens have successfully improved progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in these two types of patients. Triple drug regimen is considered the current standard of care for newly diagnosed MM patients. However, with the advent of four drug regimens, some studies demonstrated a significant improvement in PFS and OS compared to standard of care where as others showed marginal to no difference. Also, it remains unclear whether the benefits of using four drug regimen outweigh the risks. Thus, the aim of our meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of four drug versus three drug regimens among newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Methods: We built a PICO based search strategy using keywords like "multiple myeloma", "randomized clinical trials" and ran literature search on PubMed, Embase, Wiley Cochrane Library, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov ranging from the date of inception till 16th July, 2020. A pre-validated data extraction sheet was used to extract data on PFS, OS and ≥Grade 3 hematologic adverse events at the longest follow-up. We included only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing four versus three drug regimen in newly diagnosed MM patients. We excluded studies other than RCTs, studies conducted on relapsed refractory MM patients or other plasma cell dyscrasias. A generic variance weighted random effects model (DerSimonian and Laird) was used to derive hazard ratio estimates along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for PFS and OS. Risk ratio along with its 95% CIs was estimated for Grade ≥3 hematologic adverse events. Heterogeneity was assessed with Cochrane Q -statistic and was quantified with I2 test (I2 >50% was consistent with a high degree of heterogeneity). A pre-specified sensitivity analysis was also performed for risk of adverse events. Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to assess the quality of included RCTs and GRADE was used to rate the quality of evidence. Results: Initial search retrieved 7622 titles. After duplicate removal, 4880 articles were left. Following initial screening, 58 articles were considered for full text review. Of these only 3 studies (n=2277) met inclusion criteria. Four drug regimens included daratumumab, bortezomib, melphalan-prednisone (D-VMP), daratumumab, bortezomib, thalidomide-dexamethasone (D-VTd) and bortezomib and melphalan prednisone and thalidomide (VMPT-VT) respectively. Whereas, three drug regimens were bortezomib, melphalan-prednisone (VMP), bortezomib, thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTd) and bortezomib, melphalan and prednisone (VMP) respectively. There was a significant improvement in PFS when 4 vs 3 drug regimens were compared in patients with newly diagnosed MM (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.46-0.62, p-value:<0.001, I2: 0%). Also, OS improved significantly in four drug regimen group (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.51-0.76, p-value:<0.001, I2: 3.5%). There was no statistically significant difference in any grade ≥3 hematologic adverse events when 4 vs 3 drug regimens were compared (RR: 1.26, 95% CI: 0.93-1.73, p-value:0.14, I2: 93%). Sensitivity analysis after removing D-VTd regimen from any grade ≥3 hematologic adverse events revealed similar results (RR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.97-1.13, p-value:0.23, I2: 23%) confirming the robustness of analysis. When each hematologic adverse event was looked at separately, there was no difference between 4 vs 3 drug regimen in rates of anemia (RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.76-1.28, p-value:0.92, I2: 0%), neutropenia (RR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.00-1.94, p-value:0.05, I2: 85%) and thrombocytopenia (RR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.92-1.39, p-value:0.24, I2: 33%). There was low risk of bias and strength of evidence was of moderate. Conclusion: Using four drug regimens, compared to three drug regimens, significantly improves PFS and OS among newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients without any difference in the risk of ≥3 grade hematologic adverse events. Further randomized clinical trials are required to establish four drug regimen as standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Thromboprophylaxis In Multiple Myeloma Patients Undergoing Immunomodulatory Therapy with Thalidomide and Lenalidomide: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 1090-1090
Author(s):  
Marc Carrier ◽  
Gregoire Le Gal ◽  
Jason Tay ◽  
Cynthia M. Wu ◽  
Agnes Y. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Literature Search Strategy ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Data Source

Abstract Abstract 1090 Background: The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) is high in patients treated with thalidomide (T)- and lenalidomide (L)-based regimens containing dexamethasone (D) and/or cytotoxic chemotherapy (C). Consensus guidelines recommend routine thromboprophylaxis but reliable data from randomized controlled trials are lacking. Recent observational studies have suggested that thromboprophylaxis might be efficacious in decreasing the risk of VTE in this population. Purpose: To determine the absolute rates of VTE with and without different thromboprophylactic agents (ASA, warfarin, low-molecular-weight-heparin [LMWH]) in patients with newly diagnosed or previously treated MM receiving T- or L-based regimens. Data Source: A systematic literature search strategy was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials and all EBM Reviews of published studies up to Jan 2010. Results: A total of 66 studies were included in the analyses. Of these, 61 (4264 patients) and 5 (1119 patients) assessed T- and L-based regimens, respectively. Thalidomide-based regimens The rates of VTE (per 100 patient-cycles) in patients with newly diagnosed MM treated with T-based regimens: The rates of VTE (per 100 patient-months) in patients with previously treated MM managed with T-based regimens: Lenalidomide-based regimens The rates of VTE (per 100 patient-cycles) in patients with newly diagnosed MM treated with L-based regimens: The rate VTE (per 100 patient-months) in patients with previously treated MM managed with L-based regimens: None of the studies reported major bleeding events. Limitations: The definition for VTE varied across studies. Most studies did not outline the diagnostic criteria for VTE. Data are not available (NA) for all prophylaxis regimens. Conclusion: Patients with newly diagnosed or previously treated MM receiving T- or L-based regimens are at high risk of VTE. It is uncertain whether thromboprophylaxis provides a clear benefit, especially in those receiving L-based therapy or have previously treated disease. Randomized controlled trials are needed to address this important clinical need. Disclosures: Lee: Eisai: Research Funding; Sanofi Aventis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Leo Pharma: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.

Meta-Analytic Summary of the Burden of Pain and Fatigue in Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 5967-5967
Author(s):  
Peter C. Trask ◽  
Mark Atkinson ◽  
Bhumi Trivedi ◽  
Andrew Palsgrove ◽  
William Benton Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Group ◽  
Common Symptom ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Eortc Qlq C30 ◽  
Eortc Qlq ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Aims: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematologic malignancy of plasma cells. Bone disease is a characteristic symptom of MM, and pain is one of its most distressing features. Anemia is also a common symptom and is manifested as fatigue and tiredness among MM patients. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the EORTC QLQ-C30 pain and fatigue scales in two clinical MM populations (one with newly-diagnosed MM and a second undergoing medical management with re-emergent or advanced myeloma) to more precisely quantify the burden of pain and fatigue in MM. Methods: Studies assessing pain and fatigue in MM were identified through a search of specific terms in the medical-subject headings and keywords in PubMed. Inclusion criteria were English-language studies published between January 1, 1996, and July 1, 2014; diagnosis of MM; and availability of data on pain and/or fatigue as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30. Full-text articles from germane abstracts were retrieved for eligibility assessment, and 27 articles were selected for inclusion in the analysis. Two groups of peer-reviewed articles were created: one consisting of publications that focused on newly-diagnosed MM and the other consisting of articles involving MM patients with advanced conditions, including those who had a disease recurrence or were receiving autologous bone marrow transplantation. The mean values and standard deviations (SDs) were recorded across all publications irrespective of sex, age, and stage of illness. Of the 27 studies, 17 did not report standard error (SE) or SD values associated with EORTC QLQ-C30 pain and fatigue scales. These missing values were estimated using the overall average of SDs for that scale observed across all studies within the publication group (either newly-diagnosed or recurrent/advanced disease). A sensitivity analysis was conducted to compare the pooled mean and SEs associated with results obtained with and without the SD imputation procedure. The means and SDs from the two sets of publications were entered into Comprehensive Meta-analysis™ with both scales (pain or fatigue) and existing or imputed SDs as grouping variables. The summary means and confidence intervals for each scale by clinical group were computed by weighting the individual studies by sample size and were statistically summarized based on a fixed-effect model. Results: The EORTC QLQ-C30 fatigue and pain scales range from 0-100 with higher scores indicating greater symptoms (i.e., more fatigue and pain). The overall mean across the 27 publications was 47.1 for fatigue and 48.2 for pain for MM patients compared to scores of 25.0 and 16.9 for a general population. The results of the sensitivity analysis indicated that estimation of the SDs for those studies missing the statistic did not have a significant effect on the summary mean estimate. In most cases, the inclusion of additional means with estimated SDs reduced the summary SE estimate associated with the summary mean. Overall, the scores for fatigue and pain across research articles involving newly-diagnosed patients (fatigue=48.5 and pain=49.1) were statistically higher (indicating worse pain and fatigue) than among patients who were recurrent or receiving more aggressive treatments (fatigue=39.9 and pain=38.7). Conclusions: The burden of pain and fatigue in MM is substantial and is different between newly-diagnosed and more advanced MM patients. Pain and fatigue can be easily quantified using standardized health-related quality of life instruments. Pivotal clinical trials in MM need to assess the impact of novel treatments on pain and fatigue. Disclosures Trask: Sanofi: Employment. Atkinson:Sanofi: Research Funding. Trivedi:Sanofi: Research Funding. Palsgrove:Sanofi: Research Funding. Jones:Sanofi: Employment. McHorney:Sanofi: Research Funding.

Bortezomib, IV cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (VelCD) as induction therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: Results of an interim analysis of the German DSMM Xia trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8516-8516 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Knop ◽  
P. Liebisch ◽  
H. Wandt ◽  
M. Kropff ◽  
W. Jung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Dose Finding ◽  
Optimum Dose ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Study Objective ◽  
Grade 3

8516 Background: Cytoreductive induction followed by HD-MEL and ASCT is considered standard of care for younger patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM). The success of this combined procedure partially depends on the efficacy of induction treatment. Bortezomib-containing induction regimens have already been shown to be superior to standard VAD. In order to further improve the efficacy of induction treatment we combined Vel with intravenous (IV) cyclophosphamide (C) and dexamethasone (D). Methods: This trial is an open, prospective, multicenter, uncontrolled phase II/III study with a planned recruitment of 400 pts. The first 30 pts were included in the dose finding study to determine the optimum dose of IV C in conjunction with Vel and D. The following 170 pts up to 60 years of age with untreated MM were enrolled to receive 3 cycles of induction with Vel 1.3 mg/m2 IV d1, 4, 8, 11; D 40 mg/d d1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12; and C 900mg/m2 IV d1. Primary study objective is response rate (≥ PR) to VelCD according to the EBMT criteria. Results: Data from the first completed 200 pts (mean age: 52 years; 74% stage III) from 36 German centers were analyzed as ITT population. Response rates are given in Table and were documented in 82% of the subjects with 13q-, in 94% with t(4;14) and in 70% with 17p-. SAEs (n=84) occurred in 24.5% of the pts and were related to Vel, C or D in 16%, 14.5% or 9.5% respectively. The mortality rate of 1% is low, 53% of the patients experienced grade 3 + 4 AEs, infections of grade 3 and 4 were reported in 2% and grade 3 paraesthesia occurred in 2%. Conclusions: This interim analysis demonstrates that bortezomib combined with dexamethasone and intravenous cyclophosphamide (VelCD) is a highly effective induction regimen for pts ≤ 60 years with newly diagnosed MM regardless of cytogenetic risk factors. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Venous Thromboembolism with Contemporary Lenalidomide-Based Regimens and Adequate Thromboprophylaxis in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4835-4835
Author(s):  
Rajshekhar Chakraborty ◽  
Saad Ullah Malik ◽  
Naimisha Marneni ◽  
Alex V. Mejia Garcia ◽  
Faiz Anwer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Combination Regimen ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Combination Regimens

Abstract Background: Lenalidomide (Len) and low-dose dexamethasone (dex) in combination with proteasome inhibitor (PI) or cytotoxic agent is an integral part of front-line therapy in multiple myeloma (MM). Use of Lenalidomide (Len) in MM had demonstrated an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in initial studies which led to the incorporation of routine thromboprophylaxis with Len-based regimens. Existing estimate of VTE incidence from a prior analysis on Len-based regimens in newly diagnosed MM is 0.8 per 100 patient-cycles [Carrier et al. 2011]. However, there is a gap in literature on the incidence of VTE in patients receiving contemporary Len-based combination regimens along with adequate thromboprophylaxis. Hence, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials to assess the incidence of VTE with Len-based regimens in newly diagnosed MM patients. Method: We queried Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and Cochrane Library databases to obtain relevant studies until March 2018. We included all phase I-III clinical trials testing a Len-based combination regimen for induction +/- consolidation therapy along with protocol-mandated thromboprophylaxis. VTE was defined as deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism (CTCAE Grade 2 or above). Our primary outcome was pooled incidence of VTE events per patient-cycle, which was subsequently converted to VTE events per 100 patient-cycle for ease of comparison with existing literature in MM. We performed meta-analyses with random-effects model using a comprehensive meta-analysis software. Heterogeneity was calculated using I2 statistic and a value <25% was considered negligible, up to 50% moderate, and ≥70% was considered substantial heterogeneity. The protocol for this systematic review is registered with PROSPERO [CRD42018102971]. Results: Initial search generated 1069 citations. After screening, 15 clinical trials with 3381 patients were included. Among 15 trials, 4 were phase I/II, 6 were phase II and 5 were phase III. All but one trial used low-dose dex. The pooled incidence of VTE events was 0.4 per 100 patient-cycles [95% CI. 0.3-0.5; I2: 70%]. Incidence rate of VTE in individual studies are summarized in Table I. The Forest Plot is shown in Figure I. Subsequently, we performed pre-specified subgroup analyses on trials with Len-dex, Len-dex + PI, Len-dex + doxorubicin and Len with Melphalan-Prednisone (MPR). The pooled incidence of VTE per 100-patient cycle with Len-dex was 0.3 [95% CI. 0.1-0.4; I2:92%], Len-dex with PI was 0.9 [95% CI. 0.3-1.6; I2: 69%], Len-dex with doxorubicin was1.5 [95% CI. 0.7-2.2; I2: 0%] and MPR was 0.3 [95% CI. 0.2-0.4; I2: 0%]. Notably, the incidence of VTE was higher with Carfilzomib-Len-dex when compared to Bortezomib-Len-dex regimens. Two trials with Len-dex + Doxorubicin had a higher rate of VTE irrespective of the dex dose. The most common modes of thromboprophylaxis used were ASA (range, 70-325 mg) and low molecular weight heparin. Conclusion: Patients with newly diagnosed MM receiving contemporary Len-based regimens have a significant incidence of VTE despite adequate thromboprophylaxis. However, the incidence rate compares favorably with prior estimate. The rate of VTE was highest with the use of Len-dex + Doxorubicin triplet regimen. In the Len-dex+PI subgroup, the incidence of VTE was higher in trials using Carfilzomib-Len-dex compared to Bortezomib-Len-dex regimen. These findings can be clinically applied at an individual level to choose a Len-based combination regimen based on the risk of thrombosis. New prophylactic agents like direct oral anticoagulants should be tested to further decrease the rate of VTE with Len-based combination regimens. Disclosures Khorana: Janssen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy. Majhail:Anthem, Inc.: Consultancy; Incyte: Honoraria; Atara: Honoraria.

Front-line daratumumab-VTd versus standard-of-care in ASCT-eligible multiple myeloma: matching-adjusted indirect comparison

Immunotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-154
Author(s):  
Philippe Moreau ◽  
Benjamin Hebraud ◽  
Thierry Facon ◽  
Xavier Leleu ◽  
Cyrille Hulin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Front Line ◽  
Adjusted Indirect Comparison ◽  
Matching Adjustment

Aim: To compare daratumumab plus standard-of-care (SoC; bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone [VTd]) and VTd alone with other SoC for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Patients & methods: We conducted an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison of progression-free and overall survival (PFS/OS) with D-VTd/VTd versus bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd), bortezomib/cyclophosphamide/dexamethasone (VCd) and bortezomib/dexamethasone (Vd). Results: After matching adjustment, significant improvements in PFS were estimated for D-VTd versus VRd (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.47 [95% CI: 0.33–0.69]), VCd (HR: 0.35 [95% CI: 0.21–0.58]) and Vd (HR: 0.42 [95% CI: 0.28–0.63]). OS was significantly longer with D-VTd versus VRd (HR: 0.31 [95% CI: 0.16–0.57]), VCd (HR: 0.35 [95% CI: 0.14–0.86]) and Vd (HR: 0.38 [95% CI: 0.18–0.77]). No significant PFS/OS differences were seen for VTd versus other SoC. Conclusion: This analysis supports front-line daratumumab for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document