scholarly journals Efficacy of Panobinostat for the Treatment of Multiple Myeloma

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evangelos Eleutherakis-Papaiakovou ◽  
Nikolaos Kanellias ◽  
Efstathios Kastritis ◽  
Maria Gavriatopoulou ◽  
Evangelos Terpos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Toxicity Profile ◽  
Therapeutic Landscape ◽  
Heavily Pretreated ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Clinical Potential ◽  
Shed Light

Panobinostat represents a potent oral nonselective pan-histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDAC) with activity in myeloma patients. It has been approved by the FDA and EMA in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone for the treatment of multiple myeloma, in patients who have received at least two prior regimens, including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory agent. In order to further explore its clinical potential, it is evaluated in different combinations in relapsed/refractory and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. This review focuses on available data about panobinostat’s pharmacology and its role in clinical practice. This review will reveal panobinostat’s efficacy as antimyeloma treatment, describing drug evolution from preclinical experimental administration to administration in phase III trials, which established its role in current clinical practice. Based on the latest data, we will present its mechanism of action, its efficacy, and most important issues regarding its toxicity profile. We will further try to shed light on its role in current and future therapeutic landscape of myeloma patients. Panobinostat retains its role in therapy of multiple myeloma because of its manageable toxicity profile and its efficacy, mainly in heavily pretreated multiple myeloma patients. These characteristics make it valuable also for novel regimens in combination with second-generation proteasome inhibitors, IMiDs, and monoclonal antibodies. Results of ongoing trials are expected to shed light on drug introduction in different therapeutic combinations or even at an earlier level of disease course.

Carfilzomib in combination with daratumumab in the management of relapsed multiple myeloma

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cyrille Touzeau ◽  
Chloé Antier ◽  
Philippe Moreau
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Drug Combination ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Refractory Disease ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Phase Ib ◽  
Therapeutic Landscape ◽  
The Us ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Us Fda

The therapeutic landscape of relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) is constantly evolving. To date, a large proportion of patients present with lenalidomide refractory disease at time of first or second relapse. In this context, few efficient options are currently available. Carfilzomib and daratumumab are approved in the relapse setting. Recently, Phase Ib and Phase III trials evaluated the triplet drug combination daratumumab–carfilzomib–dexamethasone in the relapse setting and demonstrated strong clinical efficacy, especially in lenalidomide refractory patients. Based on these results, this combination has been approved by the US FDA for relapsed MM patients. The present review discusses the safety and efficacy of daratumumab–carfilzomib–dexamethasone in MM.

scholarly journals The role of idecabtagene vicleucel in patients with heavily pretreated refractory multiple myeloma

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 204062072110196
Author(s):  
Albert Oriol ◽  
Laura Abril ◽  
Anna Torrent ◽  
Gladys Ibarra ◽  
Josep-Maria Ribera
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Clinical Development ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Acceptable Safety Profile ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients

The development of several treatment options over the last 2 decades has led to a notable improvement in the survival of patients with multiple myeloma. Despite these advances, the disease remains incurable for most patients. Moreover, standard combinations of alkylating agents, immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, and monoclonal antibodies targeting CD38 and corticoids are exhausted relatively fast in a proportion of high-risk patients. Such high-risk patients account for over 20% of cases and currently represent a major unmet medical need. The challenge of drug resistance requires the development of highly active new agents with a radically different mechanism of action. Several immunotherapeutic modalities, including antibody–drug conjugates and T-cell engagers, appear to be promising choices for patients who develop resistance to standard combinations. Chimeric antigen-receptor-modified T cells (CAR-Ts) targeting B-cell maturation antigen have demonstrated encouraging efficacy and an acceptable safety profile compared with alternative options. Multiple CAR-Ts are in early stages of clinical development, but the first phase III trials with CAR-Ts are ongoing for two of them. After the recent publication of the results of a phase II trial confirming a notable efficacy and acceptable safety profile, idecabtagene vicleucel is the first CAR-T to gain regulatory US Food and Drug Administration approval to treat refractory multiple myeloma patients who have already been exposed to antibodies against CD38, proteasome inhibitors, and immunomodulatory agents and who are refractory to the last therapy. Here, we will discuss the preclinical and clinical development of idecabtagene vicleucel and its future role in the changing treatment landscape of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.

scholarly journals Monoclonal Antibodies for the Treatment of Multiple Myeloma: An Update

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (12) ◽  
pp. 3924 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanley Abramson
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Monoclonal Antibodies ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Proteasome Inhibition ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Drug Conjugates ◽  
Fda Approval ◽  
Promising Target ◽  
High Death ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

The past two decades have seen a revolution in multiple myeloma (MM) therapy with the introduction of several small molecules, mostly orally effective, whose mechanisms are based on proteasome inhibition, histone deacetylase (HDAC) blockade, and immunomodulation. Immunotherapeutic approaches to MM treatment using monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), while long in development, began to reap success with the identification of CD38 and SLAMF7 as suitable targets for development, culminating in the 2015 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of daratumumab and elotuzumab, respectively. This review highlights additional mAbs now in the developmental pipeline. Isatuximab, another anti-CD38 mAb, currently is under study in four phase III trials and may offer certain advantages over daratumumab. Several antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) in the early stages of development are described, including JNJ-63723283, which has attained FDA breakthrough status for MM. Other mAbs described in this review include denosumab, recently approved for myeloma-associated bone loss, and checkpoint inhibitors, although the future status of the latter combined with immunomodulators has been clouded by unacceptably high death rates that caused the FDA to issue clinical holds on several of these trials. Also highlighted are the therapies based on the B Cell Maturation Antigen (BCMA), another very promising target for anti-myeloma development.

Trial design from a clinical perspective

ESC CardioMed ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 3067-3071
Author(s):  
John G. F. Cleland ◽  
Ian Ford
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Trial Design ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Commercial Company ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
General Guidance

This chapter is written primarily from the perspective of investigators with limited resources designing clinical trials to assess the effects of interventions on patient well-being and outcomes with the hope that the results might influence clinical practice and guidelines. Other perspectives should be taken into account. The advice may be less applicable when resources are abundant (e.g. phase III trials sponsored by a large commercial company). Much research is funded by commercial companies hoping for a return on investment; they will design clinical trials to increase the chance of a statistically positive result. Many investigators will do the same although their motivation may differ. However, practising clinicians, patients, and health services want trials that help inform their daily clinical practice rather than merely achieving statistical significance. Large studies may be statistically positive but of dubious practical significance. This chapter gives some general guidance on selecting patients, comparators, endpoints, and study design.

scholarly journals Sequencing multiple myeloma therapies with and after antibody therapies

Hematology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 248-258
Author(s):  
Niels W. C. J. van de Donk
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Choice Of Treatment ◽  
Heavily Pretreated ◽  
First Relapse ◽  
Pretreated Patients ◽  
New Treatment ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract In multiple myeloma (MM), treatment selection and sequencing become increasingly complex with the increasing number of therapeutic options, including antibodies. Choice of treatment is dependent on various factors including patient- and tumor-related features. In addition, treatment-related factors, such as type and response to prior therapy, are also critical in terms of the selection of a new treatment regimen. Furthermore, approval status and reimbursement policies influence treatment choice. At the time of first relapse, patients who received a bortezomib-based regimen can switch to lenalidomide-based treatment, whereas patients who received lenalidomide until progression can switch to a proteasome inhibitor–based therapy. Alternatively, there is increasing evidence that pomalidomide-based triplets are also effective following the development of lenalidomide-refractory disease both in early and later relapse settings. Patients who become refractory to immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, and CD38 antibodies have a poor prognosis. These triple-class refractory patients may benefit from novel, recently approved agents such as XPO1 inhibitors or from participation in a clinical trial. Furthermore, retreatment with agents that were received in previous lines of therapy can also be considered in heavily pretreated patients, for example, in combination with classic cytotoxic drugs. Importantly, with the increasing use of CD38 antibodies in newly diagnosed and early relapsed/refractory MM, more information is needed on the potential value of retreatment with CD38 antibodies. With the introduction of new immunotherapies with novel modes of action, we also need a better understanding of sequencing of immunotherapeutic agents by taking into account the effect of prior therapy on immune function.

scholarly journals Stem-cell transplantation in multiple myeloma: how far have we come?

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 204062071988811 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cinnie Y. Soekojo ◽  
Shaji K. Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Stem Cell Transplantation ◽  
Cell Transplantation ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Novel Agents ◽  
Optimal Timing ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

High-dose therapy (HDT) and autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) has historically been an essential part of multiple myeloma (MM) management since early studies demonstrated its efficacy in relapsed disease, and subsequent phase III trials demonstrated better responses and improved survival with this modality compared with standard chemotherapy. With further advances in the MM treatment landscape, including the development of potent novel agents, there has been an increasing debate around various aspects of ASCT, including the optimal timing, role of single versus tandem ASCT, and the practice of consolidation and maintenance therapy post-ASCT. Routine incorporation of the novel agents at each of the treatment phases, induction, consolidation when used, and maintenance has led to better responses as reflected by increasing rates of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, longer progression-free survival (PFS) with improvement in overall survival (OS) and in some of the trials. The phase III trials over the last decade have provided significant clarity on the current approach, and have raised important questions regarding the applicability of this modality in all patients. This review aims to summarize the latest literature in the field and discusses how these findings impact the practice of ASCT today.

scholarly journals Monoclonal Antibodies: Leading Actors in the Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Treatment

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 426
Author(s):  
Sonia Morè ◽  
Maria Petrucci ◽  
Laura Corvatta ◽  
Francesca Fazio ◽  
Massimo Offidani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Monoclonal Antibodies ◽  
Preliminary Data ◽  
Clinical Studies ◽  
Hematologic Malignancy ◽  
Therapeutic Options ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Incurable Disease ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Phase Ii And Iii

Multiple myeloma is a complex hematologic malignancy, and despite a survival improvement related to the growing number of available therapeutic options since 2000s, it remains an incurable disease with most patients experiencing relapse. However, therapeutic options for this disease are constantly evolving and immunotherapy is becoming the mainstay of the therapeutic armamentarium of Multiple Myeloma (MM), starting with monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) as elotuzumab, daratumumab and isatuximab. Elotuzumab, the first in class targeting SLAMF7, in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone and daratumumab, directed against CD38, in combination with Rd and with bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd), have been approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) after they demonstrated excellent efficacy. More recently, another anti-CD38 MoAb named isatuximab was approved by FDA in combination with pomalidomide-dexamethasone (Pd) in the same setting. Many phase II and III trials with regimens containing these MoAbs are ongoing, and when available, preliminary data are very encouraging. In this review we will describe the results of major clinical studies that have been conducted with elotuzumab, daratumumab and isatuximab in RRMM, focusing on phase III trials. Moreover, we will summarized the emerging MoAbs-based combinations in the RRMM landscape.

Use of supportive measures to improve outcome and decrease toxicity in docetaxel-based antiangiogenesis combinations.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 128-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatima H. Karzai ◽  
Bamidele Adesunloye ◽  
Yangmin M. Ning ◽  
Ravi Amrit Madan ◽  
James L. Gulley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Median Number ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Pulmonary Emboli ◽  
Toxicity Profile ◽  
Improve Outcome ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Combination Studies ◽  
Deep Vein ◽  
Clinical Trial Information ◽  
Deep Vein Thromboses

128 Background: We have recently completed accrual of 63 patients (pts) to our study combining lenalidomide (L), with bevacizumab (B), docetaxel (D), and prednisone (P) (ART-P). Due to the lack of improved survival and the increased toxicity of anti-angiogenic docetaxel combinations in the MAINSAIL and CALGB 90410 trials we attempted to contrast and compare our studies with the failed phase III trials. Methods: Among the first 52 pts on the ART-P, 3 received L 15 mg daily, 3 had 20 mg daily, and the rest had 25 mg daily for 14 days of every 21−day cycle (C). We later enrolled 11 more pts at L 15 mg. All pts received D 75 mg/m2 and B 15 mg/kg on day 1 with P 10 mg and enoxaparin daily throughout each C. Pegfilgrastim was given on day 2. Patients on CALGB 90410 received D 75 mg/m2 and B 15 mg/kg on day 1 with P 10 mg and on MAINSAIL received D 75 mg/m2, L 25 mg daily for 14 days of every 21−day cycle with daily P. Patients on CALGB 90410 and MAINSAIL did not receive enoxaparin or pegfilgrastim prophylactically. Results: Median number of Cs in ART-P was 16 (3−38). PFS was 22 months and median OS has not been reached. Pts with measurable disease had 1 CR and 25 PR (86.7% RR). Two patients (3%) had deep vein thromboses. Of 1,219 cycles given, 14 cycles were complicated by febrile neutropenia (FN) (1.1%). There were no treatment related deaths. In comparison, median number of Cs in MAINSAIL L+DP arm was 6, with a PFS of 45 weeks and an OS of 77 weeks. Thirty-four pts (6.5%) developed pulmonary emboli and there were 2 deaths due to toxicity in the experimental arm. Nearly 12% of Cs were complicated by FN. In the experimental arm of CALGB 90410 trial, median OS was 22.6 months with median PFS of 9.9 months. Median number of Cs was 8, and 19 pts developed thromboses/emboli (3.6%). In addition, 7% of patients developed FN and treatment related deaths were reported at 4%. Conclusions: The use of supportive care allows the ART-P combination to be given for more cycles than were given in MAINSAIL and CALGB 90401 potentiating a longer PFS, RR and possibly OS with an improved toxicity profile. This data demonstrates the potential importance of supportive measures and is hypothesis generating for future combination studies. Clinical trial information: NCT00942578.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document