Safety and Efficacy of Bortezomib in Multiple Myeloma Patients with Renal Failure Requiring Dialysis.

Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 2550-2550 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asher Alban Chanan-Khan ◽  
P. Richardson ◽  
S. Lonial ◽  
D. Siegel ◽  
S. Jagannath ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Renal Failure ◽  
Creatinine Clearance ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Advanced Renal Failure ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Duration Of Response

Abstract Introduction: Bortezomib (VELCADE®), a novel proteasome inhibitor, is currently approved for treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) patients in first relapse in the US and EU. At presentation, up to 50% of patients with MM have decreased creatinine clearance, and 20–30% have concomitant renal failure. Although bortezomib has been reported to be safe and effective in patients with renal insufficiency and creatinine clearance as low as 14 mL/min, there is currently little information on its use in patients with advanced renal failure requiring hemodialysis. We conducted a multicenter, retrospective review to investigate the safety and efficacy of bortezomib in renal failure patients requiring hemodialysis. Patients and Methods: Patients were identified by the treating physicians at the participating centers. MM patients with advanced renal failure with or without hemodialysis support who were treated with bortezomib or a bortezomib containing regimen were eligible. Patients had to be ≥ 18 years. Demographic data, dose of bortezomib, response (by EBMT criteria) and duration of response as well as available toxicity data were to be collected for a maximum of 30 patients. Results: Thus far, all data are available for 15 MM patients. The median age was 59 years (range 51–78) and 60% were male. The MM type was IgG in 7 patients, light chain disease in 5, IgA in 2, and IgD in 1. The MM subtype was kappa in 6 patients, lambda in 3, and not specified in 6. All patients had relapsed after a median of 2 prior therapies (range 1–5). All had advanced renal failure while 11 patients were receiving hemodialysis at the time of bortezomib administration. Bortezomib was given after hemodialysis in 10 patients; the timing was not specified in 1. One patient was not evaluable for response. Of the 14 evaluable patients, 2 (14%) achieved a complete response (CR), 1 (7%) had a near CR (nCR) and 2 (14%) had a partial response (PR) for an overall response rate of 36%. Five patients (36%) had stable disease and 4 (27%) had progressive disease. The response durations for the 2 patients achieving CR were 12+ and 17+ months, and for the patient with nCR was 9+ months. The duration of response for those with PR were 2 and 12+ months. One patient died due to progressive disease. One patient (7%) discontinued due to neuropathic pain at cycle 4, and 2 patients (14%) had doses held due to peripheral neuropathy, both at cycle 4. Bortezomib was otherwise generally well tolerated. One patient scheduled for hemodialysis achieved a CR with normalization of renal function without needing dialysis. Conclusion: Although there is no pharmacokinetic (PK) data available and the number of patients studied is relatively small, the information gathered from this study suggests that bortezomib can be given safely to patients with renal failure on hemodialysis who may benefit from this therapy. A formal prospective study with PK is warranted in this patient population to establish a comprehensive safety and efficacy profile and this is ongoing under the auspices of the NCI.

Activity and safety of bortezomib in multiple myeloma patients with advanced renal failure: a multicenter retrospective study

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 109 (6) ◽  
pp. 2604-2606 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asher A. Chanan-Khan ◽  
Jonathan L. Kaufman ◽  
Jayesh Mehta ◽  
Paul G. Richardson ◽  
Kena C. Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Renal Failure ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Significant Activity ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Response Data ◽  
Advanced Renal Failure ◽  
Poor Outcomes ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) frequently present with concomitant renal dysfunction, and those requiring dialysis have particularly poor outcomes. Bortezomib is a reversible proteasome inhibitor with significant activity in MM. This retrospective case analysis evaluated the feasibility and activity of bortezomib-based therapy in MM patients (n = 24) requiring dialysis support for advanced renal failure. All but 1 patient were undergoing dialysis at the time of therapy. Patients received bortezomib alone or bortezomib-based combination therapy. Among 20 patients with available response data, overall response rate (complete response [CR] + partial response) was 75%, with 30% CR + near CR. One patient was spared dialysis, and 3 other patients became independent of dialysis following bortezomib-based treatment. These encouraging results suggest that bortezomib or bortezomib-based regimens can be used in MM patients requiring dialysis, with manageable toxicities. Further studies will more formally evaluate the impact of bortezomib-based regimens in this patient population.

scholarly journals Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma complicated by dialysis-dependent renal failure

2020 ◽  
Vol 92 (7) ◽  
pp. 70-76
Author(s):  
M. V. Firsova ◽  
L. P. Mendeleeva ◽  
M. V. Solovev ◽  
I. G. Rekhtina ◽  
O. S. Pokrovskaya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Renal Failure ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Stem Cell Transplantation ◽  
Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Haematopoietic Stem Cell ◽  
Renal Response ◽  
Good Partial Response

Aim.To assess the safety and efficacy of autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) in multiple myeloma (MM) patients with dialysis-dependent renal failure. Materials and methods.During a period from May 2010 to December 2016 fourteen MM patients with dialysis-dependent renal failure aged 48 to 65 years underwent auto-HSCT. After the induction therapy complete response, very good partial response, partial response were documented in 64, 29, 7% of patients, respectively. In no case was a renal response achieved. Haematopoietic stem cell mobilization in most patients (13/14) was performed according to the scheme: G-CSF 10 g/kg. Melphalan in 3 dosages was used as pre-transplant conditioning: 100, 140 and 200 mg/m2; 13 patients underwent a single and in one case underwent a tandem auto-HSCT against the background of hemodialysis. Evaluation of the antitumor and renal response was assessed on the 100th day after auto-HSCT. Subsequently, against the background of programmed hemodialysis and in the setting of high-dosed melphalan (100200 mg/m2), 13 patients underwent a single and one patient underwent a tandem auto-HSCT. At +100 days after auto-HSCT, an antitumor response and renal response were assessed. Results.The period of agranulocytosis after auto-HSCT was from 5 to 12 days (median 8,5) and was accompanied by infectious complications, cardiac and neurological dysfunctions. At +100 days after auto-HSCT, the complete response was confirmed in 71% patients and very good partial response was confirmed in 29% patients. The minimal renal response was registered in 2 patients (14%), hemodialysis was stopped. The transplant-related mortality was absent. After a median follow-up of 53 months 5-year progression-free survival was 59%, and overall survival was 93%. Conclusion.Carrying out auto-HSCT in patients with dialysis-dependent renal failure contributed to the achievement of a minimal renal response in 14% of cases, which allowed these patients to stop hemodialysis. Patients whose conditioning regimen was performed using melphalan at a dose of 200 mg/m2showed more frequent complications in the early post-transplant period compared to patients who received a lower dose of melphalan (100140 mg/m2). Auto-HSCT in MM patients with dialysis-dependent renal failure is a feasible and effective treatment method, which in some cases contributes to independence from hemodialysis.

Isatuximab plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone in east Asian patients with relapsed multiple myeloma: IKEMA subgroup analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20015-e20015
Author(s):  
Kihyun Kim ◽  
Chang Ki Min ◽  
Youngil Koh ◽  
Kenichi Ishizawa ◽  
Sung-Hyun Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Asian Patients ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
East Asian Patients

e20015 Background: The Phase 3 IKEMA study (NCT03275285) demonstrated that isatuximab (Isa) plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with Kd in patients (pts) with relapsed multiple myeloma (RMM) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.53; 99% confidence interval [CI] 0.32–0.89; P= 0.0007). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of Isa-Kd in the East Asian patients (19 Japanese, 27 Korean). Methods: RMM pts who received 1-3 prior lines of therapy were stratified to receive Isa-Kd or Kd. Isa-Kd arm received Isa (10 mg/kg intravenously) weekly for 4 weeks, then every 2 weeks. Both arms received K (20 mg/m2 days 1-2, 56 mg/m2 thereafter) twice-weekly for 3 of 4 weeks, and d (20 mg) twice-weekly. Treatment continued until disease progression or unacceptable adverse events (AE). The primary endpoint was prolongation of PFS. Key secondary endpoints included; very good partial response or better (≥VGPR), complete response (CR) rate and minimal residual disease negativity (MRD–) rate. Results: East Asian pts (25 Isa-Kd, 21 Kd) were randomized. Pt characteristics were similar in the East Asian subgroup compared with the intent to treat (ITT) population (N = 302). Median age (Isa-Kd 64.0 [range 45–83] years vs Kd 60.0 [range 33–73] years); median prior lines Isa-Kd 2.0 (range 1–3) vs Kd 1.0 (range 1–3); refractory to lenalidomide 16.0% Isa-Kd vs 47.6% Kd; refractory to PI 20.0% Isa-Kd vs 33.3% Kd; high-risk cytogenetics 48.0% Isa-Kd vs 42.9% Kd. After a median follow-up of 20.7 months, the addition of Isa to Kd improved ≥VGPR, CR and MRD– rates (Table). The HR 0.64 (95%CI: 0.231-1.764) for disease progression or death favored Isa-Kd. Grade ≥3 AEs were observed in 79.2% Isa-Kd vs 55.0% Kd pts, serious TEAEs in 45.8% Isa-Kd vs 50.0% Kd; TEAEs leading to treatment discontinuation were lower in the Isa-Kd group (4.2% Isa-Kd vs 10.0% Kd). Overall, 64.0% Isa-Kd vs 42.9% Kd pts were still receiving treatment. Conclusions: Efficacy and safety results of Isa-Kd in East Asian pts are consistent with the results of the overall IKEMA population, in which significantly better efficacy (PFS, CR, ≥VGPR and MRD– rate) was reported in favor of Isa-Kd without an increase in the number of patients with serious TEAEs or discontinuations. Isa-Kd is a potential treatment option for East Asian pts with RMM. Clinical trial information: NCT03275285. [Table: see text]

Relapse after complete response in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: implications of duration of response and patterns of relapse

Leukemia ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 730-738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Surbhi Sidana ◽  
Nidhi Tandon ◽  
Angela Dispenzieri ◽  
Morie A. Gertz ◽  
Francis K. Buadi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Duration Of Response

A Phase III Clinical Study of Treatment of Patients with Chronic Lymphoproliferative Disorders (CLPD) with Fludarabine, Cyclophosphamide, and Rituximab (FCR) Combination.

Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 4740-4740
Author(s):  
Athanasios G. Galanopoulos ◽  
Anastasia Tsakiridou ◽  
Eurydiki Michalis ◽  
Theodoros Marinakis ◽  
George Gortzolidis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Progressive Disease ◽  
De Novo ◽  
International Prognostic Index ◽  
Prognostic Index ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Hematological Toxicity ◽  
Unsuccessful Treatment ◽  
Number Of Patients

Abstract Background: The treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with Rituximab in combination with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide was reported to be more efficacious, in terms of complete and molecular remission compared with historical data for fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide (S.O’Brien, Haematologica2002; 87:50–53). Aims: Evaluation of the clinical efficacy and toxicity of the FCR combination in patients of our Haematologic Centre. Methods: Seventeen patients, 8 males and 9 females with a median age of 69,5 years, with relapsed/refractory or de novo CLPD (9 CLL and 8 NHL patients) were enrolled in this study between February 2002 and August 2004. Fifty percent of CLL patients had Rai stage I/II and the rest 50% had Rai stage III/IV disease. Four NHL patients had an International Prognostic Index (IPI) 2, one patient IPI 3 and three patients IPI 4. All patients were treated with Rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day1 in combination with Fludarabine and Cyclophosphamide (25 mg/m2 and 250 mg/m2 respectively) for days 2 to 4, every 4 weeks, for 6 consecutive cycles. Nine patients had a history of a prior unsuccessful treatment. Results: Overall, 14 out of 17 evaluable patients (82%) were responsive to the treatment [12 patients (70%) complete response (CR) and 2 patients (12%) partial response (PR)]. The remaining 3 patients had progressive disease (NR). Hematological toxicity was acceptable (grade 2–3 neutropenia in 6/17 patients, grade 2–3 anemia and thrombocytopenia in 2/17 patients). There were no septic episodes except one case with neutropenic fever. There were no adverse events like nausea or vomiting except one patient with a serious anaphylactic reaction due to Rituximab administration. Three CLL patients died because of progressive disease. Summary/conclusions: this preliminary report suggests that the FCR regimen is an effective and safe treatment for CLPD patients, achieving higher CR rates than previous treatments. A longer follow up of a larger number of patients is required to confirm an improved survival in these patients.

Lenalidomide Plus High-Dose Dexamethasone Provides Improved Overall Survival Compared to High-Dose Dexamethasone Alone for Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (MM): Results of 2 Phase III Studies (MM-009, MM-010) and Subgroup Analysis of Patients with Impaired Renal Function.

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 3547-3547 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna Weber ◽  
Michael Wang ◽  
Christine Chen ◽  
Andrew Belch ◽  
Edward A. Stadtmauer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Renal Function ◽  
Creatinine Clearance ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Impaired Renal Function ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
High Dose ◽  
High Dose Dexamethasone ◽  
Duration Of Response

Abstract Lenalidomide is a novel, orally administered immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) that has single-agent activity against multiple myeloma (MM) and additive effects when combined with dexamethasone. We have previously reported improved response (OR), time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) with lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Len-Dex) compared to dexamethasone-placebo (Dex) based on the results of 2 phase III trials (MM-009, North American, 353 pts; MM-010, Europe, Australia, and Israel, 351 pts). In both trials patients with relapsed or refractory MM not resistant to dexamethasone, were treated with dexamethasone 40 mg daily on days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20 every 28 days and were randomized to receive either lenalidomide 25 mg daily orally on days 1–21 every 28 days or placebo. Beginning at cycle 5, Dex was reduced to 40 mg daily on days 1–4 only, every 28 days. Patients were also stratified with respect to B2M (≤2.5 vs. > 2.5 mg/mL), prior stem cell transplant (none vs. ≥ 1), and number of prior regimens (1 vs > 1). At a median follow-up from randomization of 17.1 mos (MM-009) and 16.5 mos (MM-010), both studies continue to show significant improvement with Len-Dex compared to Dex in OR (MM-009: 61% vs 20.5%, p<.001; MM-010: 59.1% vs. 24%, p<.001, respectively), TTP (MM-009: 11.1mos vs. 4.7mos, p<.001; MM-010: 11.3mos vs. 4.7mos, p<.001, respectively), and OS (MM-009: 29.6mos vs. 20.5mos, p<.001; MM-010: not estimable vs 20.6mos, p<.001, respectively). Pooled data from both trials demonstrates a significant improvement in duration of response for pts achieving ≥ PR with 122/216 pts (56.5%) who received Len-Dex continuing in remission (med. duration of response not reached but > 68.1 wks) compared to only 22/76 pts (28.9%) treated with dexamethasone alone (med. duration of response 22.1 wks, p<.001). An additional subgroup analysis was performed on pts with impaired creatinine clearance (cr cl). No significant difference in response rate, TTP, or OS was noted for patients with cr cl above or below 50 ml/min who were treated with Len-Dex, but for 16 pts with cr cl <30ml/min, med. TTP and OS was shorter than for those with cr cl >30ml/min, but still significantly higher than for pts treated with Dex. Grade 3–4 thrombocytopenia was significantly higher in pts with impaired renal function (<50ml/min, 13.8%; >50ml/min 4.6%, p<.01; <30ml/min, 18.8%, >30 ml/min, 5.5%, p<.05), but there was no difference for G3–4 neutropenia at either cutoff. Phase I–II evaluation to establish appropriate dosing in pts with cr cl < 30ml/min, particularly with respect to thrombocytopenia is warranted, but should not underscore improved OR, TTP, and OS for pts treated with Len-Dex regardless of creatinine clearance.

Treatment Patterns & Survival In Multiple Myeloma Patients Sequentially Exposed To Thalidomide, Bortezomib & Lenalidomide In a UK Single Centre

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 5380-5380 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie L Tarant ◽  
John Ashcroft ◽  
Sylvia Feyler ◽  
Roger G Owen ◽  
Christopher Parrish ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Single Centre ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Duration Of Response

Abstract Background In recent years, the introduction of the immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) thalidomide & lenalidomide & the proteasome inhibitor (PI) bortezomib has substantially improved the therapeutic options & prolonged survival of patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM). Current treatment strategies involve sequential exposure to these agents, though the most effective sequencing of exposure has yet to be determined. MM is still, for the majority of pts, a relapsing & incurable disease with poor survival outcomes & alternative treatment approaches in relapsing disease after exposure to currently available novel agents is an on-going unmet need. We report the results of extended follow-up in this patient cohort. Objectives We examined outcomes in pts with progressive disease following sequential exposure to thalidomide, bortezomib & then lenalidomide, to assess responses to these & subsequent therapies in a “real-life” single centre setting. Methods Pts were eligible for this retrospective study if they had received sequentially thalidomide-, bortezomib- then lenalidomide-based combination therapy (LenCom) for MM as per The National Institute for Health & Care Excellence (NICE) guidance. Case records were examined for diagnostic details, depth & duration of response to PI treatment & regimens employed. T0 was defined as the time point at which LenCom was discontinued, whether for progressive disease (PD) or intolerance (I). Response to therapy subsequent to T0& Progression Free Survival/Overall Survival (PFS/OS) were assessed & factors predicting outcome analysed (e.g. ISS stage at diagnosis, age, previous therapies received, previous depth & length of response to treatment). Results Between Jan’07-Sept’12, 55 pts (27 Male & 28 Female) were enrolled. Median age at diagnosis was 59 yrs (range 33-89);ISS scores were: 20% stage I, 28% stage II & 28% stage III (23% unclassified). The median number of lines of therapy prior to LenCom was 3 (range 2-6). First line therapy was thalidomide-based in 64%; 36% underwent ASCT & 4 pts underwent tandem ASCT/RIC AlloSCT. Second line therapy was bortezomib-based in 42% &  53% pts received lenalidomide as > 4th line. Median time from diagnosis to commencing LenCom was 52.5mns (range 4-146). 43 pts (77%) had reached T0 (PD n=29, I n=14). At a median of 66 mns follow up (range 12-162 mns), a median of 9 cycles (range 1-32) of LenCom were administered to all pts & 7 cycles (range 1 -32) to those who had discontinued LenCom. Dexamethasone was discontinued after median 12 cycles in pts reaching T0, being stopped in 28% (median 6 cycles before T0). Median PFS from commencement of LenCom was 16.2 mns. At 4 mns median follow-up post T0, a total of 26 pts have received therapy after T0, of whom 3 received lenalidomide-based treatment (11.5%) & 3 received bortezomib-based treatments (11.5%). Thalidomide based treatment was received by 13 pts (combined with Bendamustine in 3 & bortezomib in 2). Post-T0 pts also received clinical trial therapies (3 pts on SRT501 trial, 1 pt on pomalidamide companion study & 1 pt on KW2478 – a heat shock protein 90 inhibitor), thalidomide-based treatment (10 pts, 2 with bortezomib), & high dose dexamethasone. 13 pts (50%) demonstrated PD as maximum response to first post-T0 therapy. Duration of response was generally very limited (median 0 mns, range 0-6 mns). Second line post T0 treatments, including pomalidomide, were received by 12 pts with only 2 pts pts achieving a PR or better to Thalidomide & bortezomib based regimens. Third line post T0 treatments were given to 2 pts with 1 pt achieving a further brief PR to DT-PACE. With a median follow-up of 6.4mns (1-37), 31 pts have died (PD n=18, infection n=6, other n=7). Median OS from diagnosis & commencement of LenCom were 100 mns & 18.4 mns, respectively. Median OS from T0 was 3.9mns (range 0-33 mns), influenced by the b2-microglobulin at T0 (<vs.³ 3.0 mg/L: 9 vs. 4.8 mns, p=0.027). The depth of response to LenCom correlated with PFS (P<0.001) but not post-T0OS (p=0.68). Conclusion Pts with MM who have relapsed after sequential exposure to thalidomide, bortezomib & lenalidomide have very limited treatment options. At present, a wide range of treatments are used, including re-challenging with lenalidomide, bortezomib & trial based treatments. However, few pts achieve a meaningful response to therapy & survival is consequently extremely poor. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Safety and Efficacy Analysis of Selinexor-Based Treatment in Multiple Myeloma, a Meta-Analysis Based on Prospective Clinical Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yali Tao ◽  
Hui Zhou ◽  
Ting Niu
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Complete Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Grade 3

Background: Selinexor (SEL) is an orally bioavailable, highly-selective, and slowly-reversible small molecule that inhibits Exportin 1. Preclinical studies showed that SEL had synergistic antimyeloma activity with glucocorticoids, proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and immunomodulators. The combination of selinexor and dexamethasone (DEX) has been approved in the United States for patients with penta-refractory multiple myeloma in July 2019. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of selinexor based treatment in Multiple myeloma.Methods: We systematically searched the Medline (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Library databases and ClinicalTrials.gov. Outcome measures of efficacy included overall response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), stringent complete response rate (sCR), complete response rate (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), partial response rate (PR), minimal response (MR), rate of stable disease (SDR), rate of progressive disease (PDR) and median progression-free survival (mPFS). Safety was evaluated by the incidences of all grade adverse events and Grade≥3 adverse events. The subgroup analysis was conducted to analyze the difference in different combination treatment regimens (SEL + DEX + PIs vs SEL + DEX).Results: We included six studies with 477 patients. The pooled ORR, CBR, sCR, CR, VGPR, PR, MR, SDR, and PDR were 43% (18–67%), 55% (32–78%), 5% (−2–13%), 7% (4–11%), 14% (5–24%), 23% (15–31%), 11% (8–14%), 26% (14–38%) and 14% (4–23%), respectively. SEL + DEX + PIs treatment had higher ORR (54 vs 24%, p = 0.01), CBR (66 vs 37%, p = 0.01), sCR (10 vs 2%, p = 0.0008), and VGPR (23 vs 5%, p &lt; 0.00001) compared to SEL + DEX treatment, and lower PDR (4 vs 23%, p &lt; 0.00001) and SDR (17 vs 37%, p = 0.0006). The pooled incidences of any grade and grade≥3 were 45 and 30% in hematological AEs, and in non-hematological AEs were 40 and 30%, respectively. The most common all grade (68%) and grade≥3 (54%) hematological AE were both thrombocytopenia. Fatigue was the most common all grade (62%) and grade≥3 (16%) non-hematological AE. Compared to SEL + DEX treatment, SEL + DEX + PIs treatment had lower incidences of hyponatremia (39 vs 12%, p &lt; 0.00001), nausea (72 vs 52%, p &lt; 0.00001), vomiting (41 vs 23%, p &lt; 0.0001), and weight loss (42 vs 17%, p = 0.03) in all grade AEs. Meanwhile, SEL + DEX + PIs treatment had lower incidences of anemia (36 vs 16%, p = 0.02), fatigue (20 vs 13%, p = 0.04), hyponatremia (22 vs 5%, p &lt; 0.0001) than SEL + DEX treatment in grade≥3 AEs.Conclusion: Our meta-analysis revealed that selinexor-based regimens could offer reasonable efficacy and tolerable adverse events in patients with multiple myeloma. SEL + DEX + PIs treatments had higher efficacy and lower toxicities than SEL + DEX.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors in Multiple Myeloma - a Systematic Review of Early Phase Clinical Trials

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 5629-5629
Author(s):  
Sharoon Samuel ◽  
Muhammad Junaid Tariq ◽  
Muhammad Usman ◽  
Amna Khalid ◽  
Muhammad Asad Fraz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Hdac Inhibitors ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Early Phase Clinical Trials

Abstract Introduction Recent studies in novel therapies have created opportunities for new treatment regimens to be used in the management of multiple myeloma. Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors lead to epigenetic manipulation of multiple myeloma (MM) cells by reducing resistance to pro-apoptotic signals. Panobinostat is an FDA approved HDAC inhibitor for multiple myeloma. The aim of this article is to study the safety, efficacy and dose limiting toxicities of HDAC inhibitors in the early phase clinical trials in multiple myeloma. Methods We performed a comprehensive literature search for phase I & I/II trials of HDAC inhibitors during last ten years using following databases: PubMed, Embase, AdisInsight, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Studies involving HDAC inhibitors in multiple myeloma other than panobinostat irrespective of the age, sex or specific eligibility criteria were included. Results Out of 2537 studies, we included 25 trials (23 phase I, 2 phase I/II) of HDAC inhibitors in this systematic review having a total of 518 patients. Of these, 471(90.9%) patients were evaluable for response. Vorinostat (Vor) is the most studied drug used in 13 trials (n=281). Two trials had Vor-only regimen and the remaining 11 had combination regimens mostly with lenalidomide and bortezomib. Vor, in combination with lenalidomide (R), bortezomib (V) and dexamethasone (d) has showed 100% overall response rate (ORR) in 30 newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients, (Kaufmann et al., 2016), fifty two percent patients achieved very good partial response (VGPR) and 28% patients showed complete response (CR). Another study using Vor + R regimen after autologous stem cell transplant in 16 NDMM patients showed VGPR in 7, stringent complete response (sCR) in 4, partial response (PR) in 2 and CR in 3 patients (Sborov et al.). Grade 3 neutropenia was seen in 1 patient in this study. Richter et al, 2011 showed an ORR of 24% in 29 relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients with Vor only regimen. Another study (Kaufmann et al., 2012) with Vor only regimen used in 10 RRMM patients showed stable disease (SD) in 9 and minimal response (MR) in 1 patient. ORR of 65% was achieved in 31 RRMM patients receiving Vor in combination with doxorubicin & bortezomib (Vorhees et al, 2017). Thrombocytopenia & neutropenia were reported in 94% and 59% patients respectively. Ricolinostat in combination with Rd and Vd achieved an ORR of 55% and 29% respectively in two studies with 38 and 57 evaluable patients (NCT01583283, NCT01323751). Another ricolinostat regimen with pomalidomide & dexamethasone achieved ≥PR in 6/11 RRMM patients (Madan et al., 2016). Table 1 illustrates the efficacy, number of patients and regimens used in all the studies in this systematic review. Quisinostat in a 2017 study by Moreau P et al. (NCT01464112) showed an ORR of 88% in a combination regimen with Vd in RRMM patients (N=18). Drug related adverse events were seen in 13 patients, thrombocytopenia being most common in 11 patients, 2 patients had grade 3 cardiac disorders and 1 patient had a cardiac arrest. Romidepsin in a phase I/II study (Harrison et al., 2011) combined with Vd was used in 25 RRMM patients. ORR was 60% with VGPR n=7, CR n=2, PR n=6, SD n=5 and PD n=1. Grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia in 16, neutropenia in 9 and peripheral neuropathy in 2 patients was seen. Popat et al used combination of two HDAC inhibitors CHR 3996 and tosedostat in 20 RRMM patients. ORR was 10% and SD was seen in 30% patients. Grade 3/4 toxicities seen were thrombocytopenia (n=12), leukopenia (n=6) and diarrhea (n=5). A phase I study on AR-42 drug in 17 RRMM patients (Sborov et al., 2017) showed SD in 10, PD in 4, MR in 3 patients with progression free survival (PFS) of 8.2 months. Thrombocytopenia, neutropenia and lymphopenia were seen in 11, 10 and 6 patients respectively. A detail of all grade 3 and higher adverse events along with dose limiting toxicity is given in table 2. Three trials (NCT02576496, NCT01947140, NCT03051841) of Edo-S101, romidepsin and CKD-581 are currently recruiting with 84, 93 and 18 planned number of patients. Conclusion Regimens containing vorinostat have shown an ORR up to 100% in NDMM patients. HDAC inhibitors have also shown promising efficacy up to 88% ORR in RRMM population. Majority of the patients developed cytopenias as hematological adverse events. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document