Bortezomib in Combination with Dexamethasone and Subsequent Thalidomide for Newly-Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma in Chinese Patients.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 4827-4827
Author(s):  
Zhen Cai ◽  
Weiyan Zheng ◽  
Guoqing Wei ◽  
Xiujin Ye ◽  
Jingsong He ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Staging System ◽  
Primary Treatment ◽  
Chinese Patients ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
International Staging System ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: Bortezomib-dexamethasone-thalidomide has been reported to be effective in newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) with an overall response rate of 92% and a CR rate of 18% (Alexanian et al, Hematology12(3):235–239, 2007), but this regimen has not been reported in Chinese patients. We now report our experience with this combination. Objectives: To investigate the efficacy and safety of bortezomib in combination of dexamethasone plus subsequent thalidomide as primary treatment for MM. Patients and Method: Between June 2006 and August 2007, 11 consecutive newly-diagnosed patients with symptomatic MM were treated with bortezomib at 1.3 mg/m2 IV on days 1, 4, 8 and 11, dexamethasone at 20 mg/m2 IV daily on the day of bortezomib and the day after. All patients received daily oral thalidomide that was escalated from 100 mg to 200 mg. Seven of 11 patients were male and 4 were female. Median age was 57 years (range 47–86). Seven of 11 patients were stage 2 according to the International Staging System, 4 out of 11 patients were stage 3. Eleven patients received a median of 2 cycles of therapy (range 1–6). The Blade criteria were used for response evaluation. Toxicities were evaluated according to the NCI Common Toxicity Criteria version 3. Results: Nine out of 11 patients (82%) achieved PR and 2 (18%) achieved CR; therefore the overall response rate was 100%. With a median follow-up duration of 5 months (1– 14 months), no patients died. Grade 3–4 toxicities included fatigue (3/11), thrombocytopenia (3/11), diarrhea (3/11) and orthostatic hypotension (2/11). Grade 2 neuropathy occurred in 3 out of 11 patients, herpes zoster occurred in 3 out of 11 patients. Routine anticoagulation or anti-thrombosis was not used. There was no DVT/PE in 11 patients. Conclusion: Our preliminary experience indicated that bortezomib-dexamethasone-thalidomide is highly effective in newly-diagnosed MM. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were rare after median 2 cycles of therapy. The relative lower rates of neuropathy and DVT/PE in this report with Chinese MM patients are being cautiously observed.

A Phase I/II Study of Bortezomib and Low Dose Intravenous Melphalan (BM) for Relapsed Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 2555-2555 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rakesh Popat ◽  
Heather E. Oakervee ◽  
Nicola Foot ◽  
Samir Agrawal ◽  
Patricia Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Number Of Cycles

Abstract Background: Bortezomib as a single agent has known efficacy in the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma. The overall response rate (CR+PR+MR) was 35% in the SUMMIT study and 46% in the APEX study. In-vitro studies including our own have demonstrated potent synergy with other chemotherapeutic agents such as melphalan. It therefore follows that responses to bortezomib may be further improved by the combination of such drugs. Aims: The primary objectives of this Phase I/II study was to assess the safety, tolerability and response rates in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma; secondary objectives being time to progression (TTP) and overall surival (OS). Methods: This was a multi-centre, non-randomised trial for patients with relapsed myeloma. Patients received bortezomib 1.3mg/m2 on days 1,4,8 and 11 of each 28 day cycle with melphalan on day 2 at increasing dose levels. This was initially at 10mg/m2, but due to cytopenias subsequently at 2.5 and 5mg/m2 (levels 1a, 1 and 2) and we plan to escalate to 7.5mg/m2. Up to 8 cycles were given with dexamethasone added for stable or progressive disease after 4 or 2 cycles respectively. Responses were determined by EBMT criteria. Results: To date, 18 patients have been enrolled (12 male 6 female; median age 60 [range 44–73]; median number of prior therapies 3 [range 1–5] of which 17 have had at least one autologous stem cell procedure with high dose melphalan; 10 prior thalidomide and 2 prior bortezomib). 12 patients received melphalan at 10mg/m2 but due to unacceptable delays predominantly due to thrombocytopaenia, subsequent treatment levels commenced at 2.5mg/m2. The median number of cycles completed thus far is 4 (range 0–8) and of the 16 evaluable, the overall response rate (CR+PR+MR) across all treatment levels was 50% rising to 75% following the addition of dexamethasone as per protocol. At level 1a (melphalan 10mg/m2 ,N=12, median number of cycles completed =5) the best responses (with dexamethasone as indicated) were: 1CR, 1 VGPR, 5 PR, 2 MR; at level 1 (melphalan 2.5mg/m2, N=4) 1 PR, 2 MR (after 2 cycles only). The median time to any response was 1 cycle (range 1–3 ). Three patients have progressive disease, but the median TTP and OS have not yet been reached (median follow-up 3 months). Non-haematological toxicities have been modest with 7 SAEs reported of which only 1 was possibly drug related (myocardial infarction), and 4 episodes of Grade 3 neuropathy (2 resulting in study withdrawal). The commonest grade 3–4 haematological toxicity was thrombocytopaenia (N=10) complicated by bleeding in one patient, followed by neutropenia (N=6). Summary: The combination of bortezomib and intravenous melphalan can be given safely to patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and dose escalation is ongoing. Myelosupression was the commonest grade 3–4 adverse event. A response rate of 50% was seen, which was further improved to 75% with the addition of dexamethasone. This combination may therefore result in higher responses than single agent bortezomib in heavily pretreated patients.

A Phase I/II Trial of Bortezomib, Low Dose Intravenous Melphalan and Dexamethasone for Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 3542-3542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rakesh Popat ◽  
Catherine Williams ◽  
Mark Cook ◽  
Charles Craddock ◽  
Supratik Basu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Chemotherapeutic Agents ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: Bortezomib is an effective treatment for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma with an overall response rate (MR+PR+CR) of 46% and time to progression of 6.2 months (APEX study). We and others have previously demonstrated potent in-vitro synergy with chemotherapeutic agents such as melphalan and it is likely that this will translate into improved responses in the clinical setting. Methods: This was a multi-centre, non-randomised Phase I/II clinical trial for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. Bortezomib 1.3mg/m2 was given on Days 1,4,8 and 11 of a 28 day cycle, and intravenous melphalan on Day 2 for a maximum of 8 cycles. In the Phase I component melphalan was given at 2.5, 5,7.5 and 10mg/m2 in a dose escalation scheme and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of 7.5mg/m2 was taken forward to an expanded Phase II component. Dexamethasone 20mg on the day of and the day after each dose of bortezomib was permitted for progressive or stable disease after 2 or 4 cycles respectively. Responses were classified by EBMT criteria. Results: To date 39 patients have been enrolled (median age 61years [range 40–77]) with a median of 3 lines of prior therapy [range 1–5] of which 26 (67%) have had one previous autologous stem cell procedure and 4 (10%) have had two. 23 (59%) have had prior exposure to thalidomide and 4 (10%) to bortezomib. 36 have now completed at least 1 cycle and are therefore evaluable for response. The overall response rate (CR+PR+MR) across all treatment levels was 75% rising to 81% (CR 11%; nCR 3%; VGPR 8%; PR 39%; MR 19%) with the addition of dexamethasone in 13 cases for suboptimal response. Rapid responses were seen with the median time to response being 1 month [range 1–6]. The median time to progression is 10.1 months and the median overall survival has not yet been reached at a median follow-up of 7.4 months. Of the patients that have had disease progression 7 (35%) had responses of longer duration than their previous therapy. The MTD was defined by unacceptable delays in administering treatment due to myelosuppresion. The toxicities have been acceptable with 13 SAEs reported of which 8 were hospitalisation due to infection. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were: thrombocytopenia (53%), infections (25%), neutropenia (17%) and neuropathy (17%). Three grade 3 cardiac events were seen (myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation and cardiac failure) and GCSF was administered to 13 patients as treatment and prophylaxis of grade 4 neutropenia. 13 patients were withdrawn from the study due to toxicity of which 7 were for neuropathy and 3 for delayed haematological recovery. Of note, 11 patients (28%) had pre-existing grade 1 neuropathy prior to starting therapy. Summary: The combination of bortezomib, low dose intravenous melphalan and dexamethasone appears to be highly effective in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma where a response rate of 81% is seen with 14% achieving nCR/CR. The toxicity profile associated is predictable, manageable and predominantly haematological. Recruitment is ongoing to a total of 53 patients.

Bortezomib, Low Dose Intravenous Melphalan and Dexamethasone for Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma: Final Results of a Phase I/II Clinical Trial.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 2713-2713
Author(s):  
Rakesh Popat ◽  
Catherine Williams ◽  
Mark Cook ◽  
Charles Craddock ◽  
Supratik Basu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: Bortezomib is an effective treatment for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma with an overall response rate (≥PR) of 43% and time to progression of 6.2 months (APEX study). We and others have previously demonstrated potent in-vitro synergy with chemotherapeutic agents such as melphalan and it is likely that this will translate into improved responses in the clinical setting. Methods: This was a multi-centre, non-randomised Phase I/II clinical trial for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. Bortezomib 1.3mg/m2 was given on Days 1,4,8 and 11 of a 28 day cycle, and intravenous melphalan on Day 2 for a maximum of 8 cycles. In the Phase I component melphalan was given at 2.5, 5,7.5 and 10mg/m2 in a dose escalation scheme and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of 7.5mg/m2 was taken forward to an expanded Phase II component. Dexamethasone 20mg on the day of and the day after each dose of bortezomib was permitted for progressive or stable disease after 2 or 4 cycles respectively. Responses were defined by EBMT criteria. Results: 53 patients were enrolled (median age 61years [range 40–77]) with a median of 3 lines of prior therapy [range 1–5] of which 26 (67%) have had one previous autologous stem cell procedure and 4 (10%) have had two. 23 (59%) have had prior exposure to thalidomide and 4 (10%) to bortezomib. The overall response rate (≥PR) across all treatment levels (n=52) was 65% rising to 69% (CR 19%; nCR 4%; VGPR 6%; PR 40%; MR 15%) with the addition of dexamethasone in 27 cases for suboptimal response. Of the 32 patients treated at the MTD the overall response rate (≥PR) was 78% (CR 28%; nCR 6%; VGPR 6%; PR 38%; MR 9%). Rapid responses were seen with the median time to response being 1 month [range 1–6]. The median time to progression was 10 months and the median overall survival has not yet been reached at a median follow-up of 17 months. Of the patients that have had disease progression 7 (35%) had responses of longer duration than their previous therapy. The MTD was defined by unacceptable delays in administering treatment due to myelosuppresion. The toxicities have been acceptable with 13 SAEs reported of which 8 were hospitalisation due to infection. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were: thrombocytopenia (53%), infections (25%), neutropenia (17%) and neuropathy (17%). Three grade 3 cardiac events were seen (myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation and cardiac failure) and GCSF was administered to 13 patients as treatment and prophylaxis of grade 4 neutropenia. 19 patients were withdrawn from the study due to toxicity of which 7 were for neuropathy and 3 for delayed haematological recovery. Of note, 11 patients (28%) had pre-existing grade 1 neuropathy prior to starting therapy. Summary: The combination of bortezomib, low dose intravenous melphalan and dexamethasone appears to be highly effective in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma with a response rate (≥PR) at the MTD of 78% including 34% nCR/CR. The toxicity profile is predominantly haematological.

Interim Results of An Ongoing Clinical Study Suggests Efficacy and Improved Toxicity Profile with Once a Week Bortezomib with Dexamethasone In Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients with Older Age and Co-Morbidities

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 3061-3061 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikhil C. Munshi ◽  
Saem Lee ◽  
Suman Kambhampati ◽  
Abid Mohiuddin ◽  
Michal Rose ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Previous History ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Current Time ◽  
Overall Response

Abstract Abstract 3061 The current bortezomib schedule involves administration of the drug twice a week at 1.3 mg/m2 for 2 weeks every 21 days. This regimen although effective is inconvenient and associated with side effects including neuropathy and gastrointestinal toxicities that limits its use in a proportion of patients. Therefore, to improve convenience and compliance, we have investigated efficacy and safety of a weekly regimen of bortezomib. In this one-stage phase II multi-center, open-label single-arm study bortezomib is administered once a week at 1.6 mg/m2 in combination with dexamethasone in newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma patients not considered for autologous stem cell transplant in participating Veterans Hospitals nationwide. The objective is to evaluate overall response rate and toxicity of this regimen. Patients received bortezomib at 1.6 mg/m2 IV weekly for 4 weeks followed by 1 week off and dexamethasone 40mg PO on the day of and day after each dose of bortezomib. Patients may receive 6 such 5-week cycles. At the current time 32 patients (median age - 73; range 50–88) have been enrolled at 11 Veterans Administration Hospital across the U.S. Patients had significant co-morbidities including 61% with cardiovascular problems, 58% with diabetes and/or hyperlipidemia, 58% with elevation of serum creatinine, 26% with respiratory problems and 23% with previous history of cancer. All patients were at least on 5 daily medications. Of the 32 patients enrolled, 25 patients have received at least one cycle of therapy and were evaluable for toxicity and efficacy, while 6 patients have received less than one cycle of therapy and one patient has inadequate data. With a median of 4 cycles administered, this regimen was well tolerated. None of the patients have developed grade 3 neuropathy, while grade 1 neuropathy was observed only in 2 patients and one patient with grade 1 neuropathy at diagnosis had increase to grade 2. Dexamethasone dose was reduced in 29% patients while 6% required reduction in bortezomib dose to 1.3 mg/m2. Additionally, Grade ≥1 asthenia was observed in 42%, diarrhea in 35%, and thrombocytopenia in 26%. Four patients have died of co-morbidities which were considered unrelated or probably unrelated to the treatment with bortezomib. The partial response or better was achieved in 68% patients receiving at least 1 cycle of therapy; 20% patients achieved CR/nCR and additional 12% achieved VGPR. Including MR in the analysis, overall response was observed in all evaluable patients. On intent to treat analysis including all 32 patients, overall response rate (≥ MR) was observed in 78% patients and PR or better in 53% patients. These preliminary results suggest that the once a week bortezomib regimen is effective and tolerable with reduced toxicity even in this older patient population with significant co-morbidities. Disclosures: Munshi: Millennium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Roodman:Millennium: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria.

scholarly journals Cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (CTD) as initial therapy for patients with multiple myeloma unsuitable for autologous transplantation

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (5) ◽  
pp. 1231-1238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth J. Morgan ◽  
Faith E. Davies ◽  
Walter M. Gregory ◽  
Nigel H. Russell ◽  
Sue E. Bell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Autologous Transplantation ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Initial Therapy ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Depth Of Response

Abstract As part of the randomized MRC Myeloma IX trial, we compared an attenuated regimen of cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (CTDa; n = 426) with melphalan and prednisolone (MP; n = 423) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. The primary endpoints were overall response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). The overall response rate was significantly higher with CTDa than MP (63.8% vs 32.6%; P < .0001), primarily because of increases in the rate of complete responses (13.1% vs 2.4%) and very good partial responses (16.9% vs 1.7%). Progression-free survival and OS were similar between groups. In this population, OS correlated with the depth of response (P < .0001) and favorable interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization profile (P < .001). CTDa was associated with higher rates of thromboembolic events, constipation, infection, and neuropathy than MP. In elderly patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (median age, 73 years), CTDa produced higher response rates than MP but was not associated with improved survival outcomes. We highlight the importance of cytogenetic profiling at diagnosis and effective management of adverse events. This trial was registered at International Standard Randomized Controlled Trials Number as #68454111.

scholarly journals A Phase 2 Study to Assess the Feasibility and Tolerance of the Combination of Elotuzumab, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (ERd) in the Induction, Consolidation, and Maintenance Treatment of Transplant-Eligible Patients Newly Diagnosed with Multiple Myeloma (MM)

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 603-603 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesus G. Berdeja ◽  
Tara K. Gregory ◽  
Suman Kambhampati ◽  
Bertrand M. Anz ◽  
Stefano R. Tarantolo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Overall Response

Background: The introduction of novel agents such as proteasome inhibitors (PI) and immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) with and without corticosteroids has revolutionized treatment (tx) and improved survival rates for MM. IMID/PI triplets such as VRD (bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone), VTD (bortezomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone), or KRD (carfilzomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone) are preferred inductions for transplant-eligible patients (pts). Unfortunately, the PI often has unique safety events such as peripheral neuropathy (PN) or cardiac issues that can impact the quality of life. Elotuzumab is a mAb with a dual mechanism of action (tagging MM cells and activating NK cells by binding SLAMF7). The combination of elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (ERd), is active, well-tolerated, and approved by the FDA for pts with relapsed MM. In this study, we will determine the feasibility of incorporating ERd into a transplant-eligible pt population. Methods: Pts with newly diagnosed MM requiring chemotherapy planning to undergo autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) were enrolled. Induction of elotuzumab at 10 mg/kg was administered IV on days (D) 1, 8, 15, 22 of the 1st 2 28-day cycles and days 1, 15 of the third and fourth 28-day cycles. Lenalidomide was dosed at 25 mg orally on D 1-21 of each 28 day induction cycle. Dexamethasone was administered IV concurrent with elotuzumab (28mg orally 3-24 hours prior to infusion and 8 mg IV with elotuzumab), with 40 mg orally administered on D 8 and 22 of cycles 3 and 4. After completion of the 4 induction cycles, pts proceeded to mobilization and ASCT though pts who refused transplantation were allowed to proceed directly to consolidation and maintenance if the investigator believed the pt was deriving benefit. 70-120 days after ASCT, 4 cycles of consolidation were administered (dosing similar to cycles 3-4 of induction but with lenalidomide at 15mg). Pts then went on to maintenance with elotuzumab 20 mg/kg IV on D 1, oral lenalidomide 10mg +/- 5 mg D 1-21 and dexamethasone 28mg oral/8 mg IV prior to elotuzumab infusion were dosed in 28-day cycles for up to 24 months. The primary endpoint was the induction feasibility rate (IFR) defined as the percentage of pts successfully completing 4 cycles of induction tx with ERd and able to start ASCT. Secondary end points were complete response rate (≥nCR), overall response rate (≥PR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). AEs were assessed according to CTCAE V4 and responses were assessed using the revised IMWG criteria. Results: 52 pts were enrolled: 56% male, median age 61 ys, 12% RISS III, 21% high-risk cytogenetics [17p del, t(4;14), and/or t(14;16)]. To date, 26 (50%) pts remain on active tx. 4 pts refused transplantation despite being eligible and were excluded from the IFR calculation. The IFR was 69% and the best overall response rate (ORR) was 92% (69% ≥ VGPR). With a median follow up of 20 mos, median PFS and OS for all pts were not reached. The 18 mo PFS and OS were 83% and 89% respectively. The most common AEs were fatigue (59.6%), diarrhea (42.3%) and nausea (42.3%). PN was seen in 29%, and all events were ≤ G2. There were 28 SAEs in 20 pts, including 12 tx-related SAEs. There was 1 tx-related death due to heart failure in a pt with no history of prior cardiac issues who had subsequent therapy. 29% of pts met the high-risk (HR) criteria (defined as RISS III or high risk cytogenetics) and 29% of pts were considered standard-risk (RISS I and no high-risk cytogenetics). The best ORR was 87% (67% ≥ VGPR) for HR pts and 93% (53% ≥ VGPR) for SR pts and the IFR was 57% for HR pts and 64% for SR pts. The median PFS and OS were 20.5 mos and 22.0 mos respectively for HR pts and have not been reached for SR pts. Conclusions: ERd induction, consolidation and maintenance was feasible and well tolerated in conjunction with ASCT in transplant-eligible pts. Despite high ORR for all pts, HR patients had inferior PFS and OS. This study supports the continued evaluation of this regimen in SR pts. Disclosures Berdeja: Amgen Inc, BioClinica, Celgene Corporation, CRISPR Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Janssen Biotech Inc, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Kite Pharma Inc, Prothena, Servier, Takeda Oncology: Consultancy; Poseida: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc, Amgen Inc, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals Inc, Bluebird Bio, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Celgene Corporation, Constellation Pharma, Curis Inc, Genentech, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Biotech Inc, Kesios Therapeutics, Lilly, Novartis, Poseida: Research Funding. Gregory:Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Poseida: Research Funding; Amgen: Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Yes, this was an investigational clinical study of the combination of elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in the induction, consolidation, and maintenance treatment of transplant-eligible patients newly diagnosed with multiple myeloma.

scholarly journals Phase II Study of the Combination of Daratumumab, Ixazomib, Pomalidomide, and Dexamethasone As Salvage Therapy in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Results of a Safety Run-in Analysis

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3117-3117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin L. Costello ◽  
Michelle Padilla ◽  
Edward D. Ball ◽  
Carolyn Mulroney
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Observation Period

Background: Triplet combination strategies have widely been accepted as the standard of care for the management of multiple myeloma due to improved outcomes as compared to doublets. The combination of daratumumab, pomalidomide and dexamethasone (DPd) has previously demonstrated deep and durable responses, including high rates of MRD negativity, in a heavily pretreated patient population. Quadruplet regimens offer an opportunity to further improve upon these results. We report preliminary findings from an ongoing phase 2 multicenter trial of the addition of ixazomib to the combination of DPd in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. The primary objective is to determine overall response rate and the safety and tolerability of this novel regimen. Key secondary endpoints include PFS, OS and MRD negativity rates. Methods: Eligible patients may have received ≥1 and ≤3 prior lines of therapy, have had no prior exposure to daratumumab or ixazomib, and may have not progressed on prior pomalidomide. Patients receive daratumumab 16mg/kg IV weekly x 8 doses, biweekly x 8 doses, then monthly, pomalidomide 4mg PO days 1-21/28, ixazomib 4mg PO days 1,8,15 every 28 days, and dexamethasone 40mg PO weekly. Patients continue on therapy until disease progression, intolerability or preference. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were defined as grade 3-4 hematologic adverse events (AE) or any AE that required a dose modification of pomalidomide or ixazomib at the lowest dose levels on a dose de-escalation plan. An interim safety review was performed after the first 6 patients were enrolled and completed the DLT observation period, which is the first cycle (28 days) since the start of a new dose level of pomalidomide and/or ixazomib. Results: At the time of this analysis, six patients have been enrolled and treated, and completed the DLT observation period. Patients had a median age of 62 (range 52-65) and median number of 2 prior lines of therapy (range 1-2). All patients were refractory to lenalidomide and pomalidomide-naïve. Common adverse events (AEs) included neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, GI upset, and upper respiratory infection. Grade 3-4 AEs were predominantly hematologic including neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, but also included grade 3 hypertension in 1 patient, and grade 3 hypophosphatemia, grade 4 hypokalemia, and grade 3 small bowel infection in 1 patient. No IRR > grade 2 occurred with daratumumab administration. No DLTs occurred in the first six patients in the safety run-in. The overall response rate of the cohort is 100% with 3 patients achieving a stringent complete response (CR), and 3 patients achieving a very good partial response (VGPR) after a median of 7 cycles of treatment. One patient discontinued therapy due to influenza A, the other five remain on therapy. Minimal residual disease assessments are being performed by EuroFlow for patients in VGPR or better due to concern for daratumumab interference. Pharmacodynamic changes in patients' tumor microenvironments were established by custom panel mass cytometry to include T-cell memory and activated subpopulations, B-cell content, NK-cell subpopulations as well as MDSCs, Tregs and T-exhaustive markers, monocytes and dendritic cells. Conclusion: The quadruplet regimen DIPd in patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma is a well-tolerated combination and has shown early safety in an initial safety run-in analysis. Enrollment continues in an expansion cohort to assess efficacy at multiple sites with the University of California Hematologic Malignancies Consortium. Figure Disclosures Costello: Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Phase II Trial of Lenalidomide, Cyclophosphamide, and Dexamethasone (CRd) for Newly Diagnosed Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 190-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaji Kumar ◽  
Suzanne R. Hayman ◽  
Francis K. Buadi ◽  
Martha Q. Lacy ◽  
Keith Stewart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
M Protein ◽  
Hematological Toxicity ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: The combination of lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rev/Dex) has been shown to be a highly effective therapy for multiple myeloma (MM). Over half of the patients with newly diagnosed MM achieve a complete response with prolonged therapy. More recently, a phase III trial demonstrated improved survival with use of lenalidomide and low dose dexamethasone with one year survival in excess of 90%. We report the initial results from a phase II trial combining lenalidomide and low dose dexamethasone with cyclophosphamide (CRd) as initial therapy of newly diagnosed MM. Methods: The trial was initiated in July 2006 and completed the target accrual of 33 patients by July 2007. The treatment protocol consisted of lenalidomide given orally at a dose of 25 mg daily on days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle. Dexamethasone (dex) was given orally at a dose of 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Cyclophosphamide at a dose of 300 mg/m2 was given on days 1, 8, and 15 of each cycle. Patients also received an aspirin once daily as thromboprophylaxis. Response was defined as a decrease in serum monoclonal (M) protein by 50% or higher and a decrease in urine M protein by at least 90% or to a level less than 200 mg/24 hours, confirmed at least 4 weeks apart. Results: The median age was 63 years (range, 44–79). Eight patients (24%) had ISS stage III disease. At this time, 19 of the 33 patients are evaluable for confirmed responses (i.e., off-study or completed at least 4 cycles of therapy). Of these, 2 achieved VGPR and 13 had a partial response giving an overall response rate of 79%. The response rate was affected by 5 of 19 patients who went off study within three cycles due to toxicities [interstitial nephritis (1 pt), multiple grade 3 toxicities including infection (1 pt) atrial fibrillation and infection (1 pt)] or alternative treatment [no response and possible renal toxicity (1 pt) and progression at 4 cycles (1 pt)]. Overall, hematological toxicity was the most common with grade 4 toxicity seen in 6 patients (20%). Non-hematological grade 3 or higher toxicities included fatigue (4 pts), thrombosis (3 pts) and renal failure (2 pts). One patient with thrombosis came off study for other toxicities, and the other two continued on study with anticoagulation. Thirteen patients (43%) had dose reductions of both cyclophosphamide and lenalidomide, most commonly due to hematological toxicity. So far, 12 patients have gone off study, 6 went to stem cell transplant, 3 due to adverse events, 1 due to disease progression and 2 patients went to alternate treatment. Conclusions: CRd has excellent activity in newly diagnosed myeloma with an estimated overall response rate of 79%. Response evaluation of the entire 33 patients will be presented at the meeting. We believe that the initial use of a 300 mg/m2 dose of cyclophosphamide resulted in 5 of the first 19 pts experiencing early toxicity and withdrawal. As a result, an expansion of the current trial is evaluating lower doses of cyclophosphamide (300 mg fixed dose). Full analysis of this study will be needed to determine if CRd can improve outcome compared to Rd.

A Phase I/II Study of Bendamustine, Low-Dose Dexamethasone, and Lenalidomide (BdL) for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 1851-1851
Author(s):  
Stefano Sacchi ◽  
Samantha Pozzi ◽  
Stefania Badiali ◽  
Attilio Guarini ◽  
Carla Mazzone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Dose Level ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Concomitant Treatment ◽  
Toxicity Profile ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 1851 Background: Bendamustine, an agent sharing properties of alkylators and purine analogous, showed a strong efficacy and safe toxicity profile in relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) patients (pts), with a maximally tolerated dose (MTD) ranging from 100 mg/m2/die day 1 and 2 as single agent to 60 mg/m2/die in association with thalidomide. In a pooled analysis of two large phase 3 trials Lenalidomide, an analogous of thalidomide with strong activities in MM, significantly improved overall response rate and progression-free survival. Since the role of Lenalidomide in the treatment of naïve and relapsed/refractory pts has been well established, the current research is focused on the combination of Lenalidomide with chemotherapy to further improve patient outcome. Methods: This multicenter phase I/II trial was designed to investigate the combination of Bendamustine, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (BdL) in repeating 4-week cycles as treatment for relapsed MM. Pts over 18 years with measurable stage II or III MM who relapsed after 1 to 3 previous lines of therapy, including bone marrow transplantation were considered eligible. Prior Lenalidomide and Bortezomib were allowed. The phase I study was conducted using a 3+3 cohort design beginning at a dose level 0 of intravenous Bendamustine 40 mg/m2/die days 1 and 2, oral Lenalidomide 10 mg/die days 1–21 and oral Dexamethasone 40 mg/die days 1, 8, 15, and 22 (28-day cycle). The dose of Bendamustine and Lenalidomide (from 0 to 5) were increased from one cohort to the next, in a 3+3 dose escalation scheme to reach the MTD (Table 1). The MTD of Bendamustine and Lenalidomide were evaluated during the first treatment course (cycle 1). Enrollment at each subsequent dose level was permitted only if the first 3 patients at the previous level received 1 cycle with an acceptable dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). DLTs were defined as any adverse event (AE) possibly related to the study drug ≥grade 3 CTC. If 1 of the 3 subjects experienced DLT during the first cycle, 3 more subjects were to be recruited and treated at the same dose level of Bendamustine and Lenalidomide. Treatment was given until plateau of best response according to the International Myeloma Working Group uniform response criteria for a maximum of 6 cycles. Results: Herein, we present the results from phase I of the study which established MTD. Fifteen pts with a median age of 69 years (range 49 to 88) were enrolled between October 2011 and February 2012. The number of prior therapies was at maximum 3 as per protocol: Lenalidomide (27% of pts), thalidomide (33% of pts), Bortezomib (67% of pts) and 13% of the pts had a prior autologous stem cell transplant. Because 3 DTL were observed in Phase I, the MTD was set at 40 mg/m2/die for Bendamustine and 10 mg/die for Lenalidomide. DLTs at dose level 1 included: 1 grade 4 cutaneous rash; at dose level 2: 1 grade 4 thrombocytopenia and 1 grade 3 bronchopneumonia with renal dysfunction (Table 2). Among the 15 patients with evaluable data, the grade 3 or 4 AEs observed in ≥10% of patients included neutropenia (20%), thrombocytopenia (13%) and anemia (20%). Two patients died of treatment-related complications: 1 for hematological toxicity and CNS hemorrhage, and 1 for cardiac ischemia. Fifteen patients received at least 2 cycles and were included in the response assessment. The overall response rate was 40% with 1 case achieving complete response and 1 a very good partial response. Until now 7 pts entered the phase II part of the trial. Conclusions: In pretreated patients with relapsed MM, MTD was determined to be Bendamustine 40 mg/m2/die on days 1 and 2, and Lenalidomide 10 mg/m2/die on days 1–21, plus Dexametasone 40 mg/die on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. This BdL schedule was relatively tolerated and showed promising efficacy. Based on the mainly myelosuppressive properties, concomitant treatment with growth factors are recommended for all patients. The toxicity profile of BdL scheme resulted in an acceptable treatment-related toxicity and mortality and induced a good quality responses in a pretreated population of MM pts. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

The Clinical Study of Combination of Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 5217-5217
Author(s):  
Juan Li ◽  
Lijin Zeng
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Complete Remission ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Common Adverse Event ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract OBJECTIVE: To study retrospectively the response and side effects in two groups of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) receiving bortezomib and dexamethasone regimen (VD) and vincristine combined with pirarubicin and dexamethasone and melphalan regimen (VADM). METHODS: Nineteen patients were enrolled in a group of VD, receiving bortezomib 1.3mg/m2 on days 1,4,8,11 and dexamethasone 20mg on days 1–4 in a 21-day cycle. Blade Standard was used to evaluate the therapeutic effect and NCI-CTC was used to assess the adverse effect. Thirty-one matched patients with newly diagnosed MM who received VADM were used as a historical control group, receiving vincristine 0.4mg/d and pirarubicin 9mg•m−2•d−1 and dexamethasone 20mg/d and melphalan 12mg/d on days 1–4, with 28 days as a cycle. RESULTS: During the median 9 months’ follow-up of patients who received VD, there were 73.7% patients(14/19)responding to the treatment, including 9 cases (47.4%) of complete remission or near complete remission. Light-chain type patients who received VD had a higher overall response rate and CR +nCR rate than that of the VADM (P&lt;0.05). The patients receiving VD who had renal inadequacy had an effective rate of 69.6% (5/6), which was similar to that of the others (69.2%, 9/13), and renal function relieve could be shown in the chemotherapy. The main adverse effects were fatigue, diarrhea, peripheral neuropathy, thrombocytopenia, and infection, with incidences of 73.8%, 68.4%, 63.2%, 31.5% and 26.3% respectively. Most of the adverse effects were mild and could be relieved by symptomatic treatments. The most common adverse event in the control group was neutropenia (83.8%), followed by infection(35.5%), vomiting (35.5%) and loss of hair(32.5%). CONCLUSION: Although there was no significant difference of overall response rate between VD and VADM, VD has higher CR +nCR rate compared with VADM. VD can be tolerant in most patients, and is also safe in patients with renal inadequacy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document