VELCADE/Dexamethasone (Vel/Dex) Versus VAD as Induction Treatment Prior to Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT) in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (MM): An Interim Analysis of the IFM 2005-01 Randomized Multicenter Phase III Trial.

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 56-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Luc Harousseau ◽  
Gerald Marit ◽  
Denis Caillot ◽  
Philippe Casassus ◽  
Thierry Facon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Β2 Microglobulin

Abstract ASCT is considered the standard of care for patients up to 65 years of age with MM. The optimal induction treatment prior to ASCT is still unknown. VAD is a commonly used regimen but is associated with a number of toxicities, administrative inconvenience, and a complete remission (CR) rate of typically less than 10%. Recently the combination thalidomide/Dex was reported to induce a higher overall response rate than Dex alone in newly diagnosed patients, but with significantly more toxicities, especially deep vein thrombosis, and a 4% CR rate (Rajkumar et al, J Clin Oncol 2006;24:431–6). In a phase II trial we have evaluated the combination of Vel 1.3mg/m2 D1, 4, 8, 11 with Dex 40mg/D D1-4, D9-12, for 4 consecutive 21-D cycles (Dex only on D1-4 during cycles 3–4). This combination was well tolerated and yielded a 21% CR/nCR rate with successful stem cell harvest and engraftment (Harousseau et al, Haematologica 2006). In 2005, the IFM initiated a multicenter randomized phase III trial comparing Vel/Dex with VAD as induction treatment of patients with newly diagnosed MM up to the age of 65. The primary objective of the study is the CR (negative immunofixation) plus nCR (CR but positive immunofixation) rate after 4 cycles. A secondary objective is to evaluate the role of consolidation with 2 courses of DCEP (Dex, cyclophosphamide, etoposide, cisplatin). Patients were randomized at diagnosis among 4 arms (A1: 4 cycles of VAD; A2: 4 cycles of VAD + 2 cycles of DCEP; B1: 4 cycles of Vel/Dex; B2: 4 cycles of Vel/Dex + 2 cycles of DCEP); stratification was by cytogenetics and β2 microglobulin. Stem cell collection was performed between cycle 3 and cycle 4 after priming with G-CSF (10μg/kg/D × 6 D). At the end of induction (± DCEP consolidation) treatment, patients received melphalan 200mg/m2 plus ASCT. Enrollment of 480 patients is planned, to detect a 10% higher CR/nCR rate with Vel/Dex (20% vs 10%) with 80% power (two-sided test, significance level 0.05). An interim analysis is planned when 222 patients have been evaluated for response at the end of induction. As of July 2006, 304 patients have been enrolled. Randomization of the 222 patients to be considered for interim analysis was completed on May 19th. Baseline characteristics include: median age 55y; 140M, 82F; β2 microglobulin >3mg/L in 54%; del13 by FISH in 45%. The occurrence of serious adverse events (SAEs) was similar between the VAD and Vel/Dex arms (31% with VAD, 33% with Vel/Dex). The most frequent SAEs were pneumopathy (5.3% VAD, 4.0% Vel/Dex), thrombosis (2.7% VAD, 3.3% Vel/Dex), and peripheral neuropathy (1.3% VAD, 3.3% Vel/Dex). We intend to present results from the interim analysis.

First Analysis of HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing Bortezomib, Adriamycine, Dexamethasone (PAD) Vs VAD as Induction Treatment Prior to High Dose Melphalan (HDM) in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (MM)

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 653-653 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Sonneveld ◽  
B. van der Holt ◽  
I. G.H. Schmidt-Wolf ◽  
U. Bertsch ◽  
L. el Jarari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
P Value ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
High Dose Melphalan

Abstract The randomized, open-label, phase III trial HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 was designed to evaluate the efficacy of bortezomib prior to HDM for response and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with newly diagnosed MM. The trial was performed in 75 referral centers in the Netherlands and Belgium (HOVON group) and Germany (GMMG group). Patients with Salmon & Durie (SD) stage II or III, age 18–65 years inclusive, were randomly assigned to 3 cycles of VAD (vincristine 0.4 mg, adriamycine 9 mg/m2 days 1–4, dexamethasone 40 mg days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20) or PAD (bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 days 1,4,8,11, adriamycine 9 mg/m2 days 1–4, dexamethasone 40 mg days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20). No thrombosis prophylaxis was given. Stem cells were mobilized using the CAD regimen, including cyclophosphamide 1000 mg/m2 iv day 1, and G-CSF. After induction therapy, all patients were to receive 1 or 2 cycles of high-dose melphalan (HDM) 200 mg/m2 with autologous stem cell rescue followed by maintenance with thalidomide 50 mg daily (VAD arm) or bortezomib, 1.3 mg/m2 once every 2 weeks (PAD arm) for 2 years. Between May 4, 2005 and May 16, 2008, 833 patients were randomized. After the trial was closed, we here report the planned interim analysis data on response after induction and HDM-1 of the initial 150 (75 per arm) randomized patients. The data of the initial 300 registered patients (150 per arm) will be available by November 1, 2008 and presented. The 2 randomization arms were equal for SD stage of disease, ISS stage, and distribution of chromosomal abnormalities. 134 patients (89%) completed PAD/VAD and 130 patients (87%) completed HDM-1, with no difference between the treatment arms. Full dose bortezomib could be administered in 95 % (PAD1), 79 % (PAD2) and 85 % (PAD3) of patients. Successful stem cell apheresis was achieved in all 132 patients who received CAD. Adverse events CTC grade 2–4 during PAD vs VAD included neurologic or polyneuropathy (PNP) 38% vs 21 %, constitutional symptoms 30 % vs 24 %. PNP of CTC grade 1–4 was more frequent in the PAD arm (p=0.01), while DVT/pulmonary embolism was diagnosed in 10 % during VAD and 6 % during PAD. Responses were assessed according to EBMT criteria including VGPR after PAD/VAD, after HDM-1 and best response on protocol treatment. Complete Response (CR), Very Good Partial Response (VGPR) and Partial Response (PR) in both arms were compared by logistic regression (table 1) Response ITT (%) PAD VAD p-value PAD+ HDM-1 VAD+ HDM-1 p-value CR 5 0 0.06 15 4 0.05 ≥VGPR 41 17 0.001 59 47 0.14 ≥PR 80 64 0.03 92 77 0.01 The (preliminary) overall complete response rate including maintenance was 27 % (PAD arm) and 5% (VAD arm) (p=0.001). Deletion of chromosome 13q did not have a significant impact on response. We conclude that PAD induces significantly more PR+VGPR+CR as compared with VAD, and that this effect is sustained after HDM-1. This trial was supported by the Dutch Cancer Foundation (EudraCT nr 2004-000944-26), the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research and a grant from Johnson and Johnson

EORTC 1709/CCTG CE.8: A phase III trial of marizomib in combination with standard temozolomide-based radiochemotherapy versus standard temozolomide-based radiochemotherapy alone in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS2072-TPS2072 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Roth ◽  
Jaap C. Reijneveld ◽  
Thierry Gorlia ◽  
Frederic Dhermain ◽  
Filip Yves Francine Leon De Vos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Standard Treatment ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Recurrent Glioblastoma ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma

TPS2072 Background: The standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma comprises maximum safe surgery, radiotherapy (RT), and concomitant and up to six cycles of maintenance temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy (TMZ/RT→TMZ). Despite this intense therapy, the prognosis remains poor and there is an urgent need to develop new therapeutic options. Marizomib is a novel, irreversible and brain-penetrant pan-proteasome inhibitor. Following its successful assessment in phase I trials in patients with newly diagnosed as well as recurrent glioblastoma, marizomib is now being investigated in a phase III trial. Methods: EORTC 1709/CCTG CE.8 is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open label phase III superiority trial. Eligibility criteria include histologically confirmed newly diagnosed glioblastoma and a performance status ≥70. Approximately a total of 750 patients will be enrolled and randomized 1:1. Stratification factors include institution, age, Karnofsky performance status and extent of surgery. The primary objective of this study is to compare overall survival in patients receiving marizomib in addition to standard of care (TMZ/RT→TMZ) with patients receiving standard treatment only. The testing strategy specifies the determination of this objective in both the intent-to-treat population and the subgroup of patients with tumors harboring an unmethylated MGMT promoter. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, safety, neurocognitive function and quality of life. The study is accompanied by a translational research program. The study will be opened at 50 EORTC sites in Europe and done as an intergroup collaboration with the Canadian Cancer Trials Group (CCTG) with 25 sites in Canada and additional sites in the US. Patient enrolment started in June 2018 and as of January 29, 2019, a total of 85 patients have been randomized. An update on the enrolment status will be provided at the ASCO conference. Clinical trial information: NCT03345095.

VELCADE/Dexamethasone (Vel/D) Versus VAD as Induction Treatment Prior to Autologous Stem Cell Transplantion (ASCT) in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (MM): Updated Results of the IFM 2005/01 Trial.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 450-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Luc Harousseau ◽  
Claire Mathiot ◽  
Michel Attal ◽  
Gerald Marit ◽  
Denis Caillot ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Response Assessment ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
Fish Analysis ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Phase Ii Studies ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Introduction. ASCT is considered the standard of care for younger patients (pts) with MM. The benefit of ASCT is at least partly related to an increase in Complete Remission (CR) plus Very Good Partial Remission (VGPR) rate. One way to increase the CR rate is to improve the induction treatment prior to ASCT. Several phase II studies with Vel in combination as induction treatment yielded promising CR rates. We have previously tested the Vel/D combination with Vel 1.3mg/m2 d1,4,8,11 with 40mg/d d1–4, d 9–12 for 4 consecutive 21d cycles (D only on d1–4 during cycles 3–4) (Harousseau et al Haematologica 2006). Methods. In July 2005, the IFM initiated a randomized Phase II trial comparing Vel/D with VAD as induction treatment prior to ASCT in pts with newly diagnosed MM up to the age of 65.This IFM 2005/01 was closed for accrual in January 2007 after having recruited 482 patients. The primary objective was the CR (negative immunofixation) plus n-CR (negative electrophoresis) after 4 cycles. The second question was to evaluate the impact of a consolidation with 2 cycles of DCEP (D, Cyclophosphamide, Etoposide, Platinum). At diagnosis pts were randomized between 4 arms (A1:4 cycles of VAD, A2: 4 cycles of VAD + 2 cycles of DCEP, A3:4 cycles of Vel/D, A4:4 cycles of Vel/D + 2 cycles of DCEP). Randomization was stratified according to β2-microglobulin and del 13 by FISH analysis. Stem cell collection was performed between cycle 3 and 4 after G-CSF priming (10μg/kg x 6d). ASCT was prepared by melphalan 200mg/m2. Results. As of Aug 2007, data from the first consecutively enrolled 222 pts have been analyzed (A1:54,A2:56,B1:55,B2:57). In the VAD arms (A1+A2),88% of pts received the planned 4 courses versus 94% in the Vel/D arms (B1+B2). In arm A2,87.5% of pts received the 2 cycles of DCEP versus 82% in arm B2. ASCT was performed in 94% of evaluable pts in arms A1+A2 and in 92% in arms B1+B2. The number of SAE was the same in the VAD and the Vel/D arms. The incidence of grade 3–4 averse events was also comparable. However the proportion of pts with neurological symptoms (all grades) during induction treatment was higher with Vel/D (36% versus 11%). Response assessment is available for 208 pts (100 VAD, 108 Vel/D). The results are shown in the table (intent-to-treat analysis). Consolidation with DCEP did not increase the CR rate (16% pre-ASCT both in arms A1+B1 and in arms A2+B2). Conclusion. This analysis not only confirms that the post-induction CR rate is increased by Vel/D compared to VAD (Harousseau ASH 2006) but also shows that this benefit translates in higher CR+VGPR rates after ASCT. Longer follow-up is needed to demonstrate that this better tumor reduction induces longer PFS and OS. Currently 1-year PFS and OS rates are respectively 90% and 95% with VAD, 93% and 97% with Vel/D. Updated results will be presented at the meeting.

Successful Harvesting of Peripheral Hematopoietic Stem Cells after Induction Treatment with Bortezomib, Adriamycin, Dexamethasone (PAD) in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (MM)

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 3470-3470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hartmut Goldschmidt ◽  
Henk M. Lokhorst ◽  
Uta Bertsch ◽  
Bronno van der Holt ◽  
Laila el Jarari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cells ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Hematopoietic Stem Cells ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Hematopoietic Stem ◽  
Cell Harvesting

Abstract The HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 trial is a prospective, randomized phase III trial to evaluate the efficacy of bortezomib prior to high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m2, HDM) on response and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with newly diagnosed MM stage II or III according to Salmon & Durie (SD). Until May 2008 in total 833 patients aged 18–65 years were included in the trial. Patients were randomized to receive three cycles of VAD (arm A; vincristin 0,4mg, days 1–4, adriamycin 9 mg/m2, days 1–4, dexamethasone 40 mg, days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20) or PAD (arm B; bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2, days 1,4,8,11, adriamycin 9 mg/m2, days 1–4, dexamethasone 40 mg, days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20). Hematopoietic stem cells were mobilized in patients using the CAD regimen (cyclophosphamide 1000 mg/m2 iv day 1, adriamycin 15mg/m2, days 1–4, dexamethasone 40mg, days 1–4) and G-CSF. After stem cell harvesting all patients received one or two cycles of HDM with autologous stem cell transplantation followed by maintenance therapy with thalidomide 50 mg daily (arm A) and bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 once every 2 weeks (arm B), respectively. As of August 2008 stem cell harvesting data from the first consecutively enrolled 150 patients (75 per arm) were analyzed. The data of the initial 300 patients (150 per arm) will be available by November 2008. Both treatment arms did not differ in age, SD stage of disease, ISS stage, and FISH abnormalities. 132 patients (88%) were treated with CAD plus G-CSF. Dosing and type of G-CSF treatment were comparable in both arms. In all patients stem cell collection was successful and at least two autografts could be harvested (minimal number of stem cells permitted per autograft was 2.0 ×106 CD 34+ cells per kg BW). Induction treatment Days until first leukapheresis Median (range) Number of leukaphereses Median (range) Number of harvested CD34+ stem cells (× 106) per kg BW Median (range) PAD 110 (96–149) 1 (1–4) 10.5 (4.1–37.6) VAD 111 (95–156) 1 (1–5) 9.3 (4.0–37.0) In 64% of the patients in arm A (VAD) and 79% of the patients in arm B (PAD) only one leukapheresis was sufficient for stem cell harvesting. In all patients hematopoietic reconstitution was achieved after HDM followed by autografts harvested after PAD or VAD. We conclude that stem cell harvesting after PAD is very well feasible.

BMT CTN 0302: A Phase II Randomized Trial Evaluating Etanercept, Mycophenolate Mofetil (MMF), Denileukin Diftitox, and Pentostatin in Combination with Corticosteroids in 180 Patients (pts) with Newly Diagnosed Acute Graft Vs. Host Disease (aGVHD)

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 55-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amin Alousi ◽  
Daniel J. Weisdorf ◽  
Brent R. Logan ◽  
Javier Bolanos-Meade ◽  
Steven C. Goldstein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation ◽  
Chronic Gvhd ◽  
Initial Therapy ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Unrelated Donor ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Denileukin Diftitox

Abstract On behalf of the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) GVHD remains a major limitation of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Steroids are the standard initial therapy yet prior data suggested only 35% complete response (CR) at day 28. We report the results of a randomized, four-arm, phase II trial designed to identify the most promising agent(s) for combination with steroids as initial therapy for aGVHD. Between August, 2005 and March, 2008, 180 pts with newly diagnosed aGVHD were randomized to receive steroids (2 mg/kg/day methylprednisolone) plus either: Etanercept, MMF, Denileukin Diftitox or Pentostatin. Pts who received MMF as GVHD prophylaxis in the preceding 7 days were randomized between the 3 non-MMF arms. The primary objective was to estimate the CR rate at day 28 for each of the four agents and evaluate secondary outcomes pertinent to the best agent for testing in a planned followup phase III trial vs steroids alone. PATIENTS AND RESULTS: Median age was 50 yrs (range, 7.5–69.9) with 96% >18 yrs; 39% had AML and 63% were male. The graft was peripheral blood (PB) in 61%, bone marrow (BM) in 25% and cord blood (CB) in 14% of pts. HCT was performed with myeloablative conditioning and/or unrelated donor grafts in 66% and 53%, respectively. Forty-four pts (24%) received MMF as aGVHD prophylaxis and were randomized to a non-MMF arm. At enrollment, 68% of patients had grade I-II aGVHD; 32% had grade III/IV. 53% of pts had visceral organ involvement at the time of enrollment. The treatment arms were balanced except CB grafts were more common in the Denileukin Diftitox arm (26%, p=0.006); PB were more common in the Etanercept arm (78%, p=0.006); and the MMF arm had more myeloablative HCT (82%, p=0.04). The proportion of CR at day 28 were: Etanercept (26%), MMF (60%), Denileukin Diftitox (53%) and Pentostatin (38%), and day 56 CR+PR rates were 59%, 78%, 68%, and 71%, respectively. 6 month chronic GVHD (cGVHD) incidence was: Etanercept (21%), MMF (25%), Denileukin Diftititox (29%), and Pentostatin (24%). Overall survival (OS) at 6 months was Etanercept (59%), MMF (71%), Denileukin Diftitox (63%), and Pentostatin (55%), respectively. After excluding pts who received MMF prophylaxis, the MMF arm still had the highest day 28 CR rate and OS. Overall toxicities and post-randomization infections were less frequent in pts randomized to MMF and Etanercept. CONCLUSIONS: These efficacy and toxicity data, particularly response, survival, cGVHD, and infections, suggest MMF + steroids to be the most promising regimen to compare against steroids alone in a randomized Phase III trial. Treatment Arm Outcome Etanercept (N=46) MMF (N=45) Denileukin Diftitox (N=47) Pentostatin (N=42) Day 28 CR 12 (26%) Skin: 12/36 (33%) 27 (60%) Skin: 21/35 (60%) 25 (53%) Skin: 17/35 (49%) 16 (38%) Skin: 14/34 (41%) L.G.I.: 4/12 (33%) L.G.I.: 12/18 (67%) L.G.I.: 5/14 (36%) L.G.I.: 7/17 (41%) U.G.I.: 5/10 (50%) U.G.I.: 11/12 (92%) U.G.I.:10/14 (71%) U.G.I.: 8/13 (62%) Liver: 2/6 (33%) Liver: 5/7 (71%) Liver: 3/7 (43%) Liver: 2/5 (40%) Day 28 CR (excl. prior MMF ) 9 (28%) 27 (60%) 15 (48%) 11 (39%) Day 28 CR/PR 22 (48%) 35 (78%) 28 (60%) 26 (62%) Day 56 CR/PR 27 (59%) 35 (78%) 32 (68%) 30 (71%) Day 56Treatment Failures 12 (26%) 4 (9%) 12 (26%) 13 (31%) OS Post-Randomization at 6 months 59% (95% CI: 43%–72%) 71% (95% CI: 54%–82%) 63% (95% CI: 47%–76%) 55% (95% CI: 38%–69%) OS Post-Randomization at 6 months (excl. prior MMF) 70% (95% CI: 51%–83%) 71% (95% CI: 54%–82%) 61% (95% CI: 40%–76%) 54% (95% CI: 33%–71%) Cum Incidence of Initial D/C of steroids at 9 months 34% (95 % CI: 20%–48%) 31% (95% CI: 17%–45%) 20% (95% CI: 8%–32%) 20% (95% CI: 8%–33%) Cum Incidence Day 56 Grade 3–5 Toxicity (%) 76% (95% CI: 63%–88%) 80% (95% CI: 67%–92%) 76% 95% CI: 64%–89%) 67% (95% CI: 52%–81%) Cum Incidence Severe/ Life Threatening/Fatal Infections at Day 270 47% (95% CI: 32%–62%) 44% (95% CI: 29%–59%) 58% (95% CI: 43%–72%) 56% (95% CI: 40%–71%) Cum Incidence of acute GVHD Flare after CR at Day 90 36% (95% CI: 21%–50%) 28% (95% CI: 14%–41%) 35% (95% CI: 21%–49%) 36% (95% CI: 21%–51%) Cum Incidence of cGVHD at Day 180 21% (95% CI: 9%–33%) 25% (95% CI: 11%–39%) 29% (95% CI: 15%–43%) 24% (95% CI: 10%–38%) Cum Incidence of Relapse at Day 180 14% (95% CI: 3%–24%) 10% (95% CI: 1%–19%) 9% (95% CI: 1%–19%) 13% (95% CI: 2%–24%)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document