Bortezomib (Velcade™) Observational Study in China - Efficacy and Safety of Bortezomib Based Regimen in 223 Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma Patients.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 4833-4833
Author(s):  
Zhi-xiang Shen

Abstract Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma-cell malignancy with approximately three years’ median survival. Patients usually relapse or become refractory to existing treatments. Clinical studies have confirmed that bortezomib is an effective agent for relapsed MM patients and has potent synergy with other chemotherapeutic agents, which provides a new clinical regimen that may improve response. In this observational study, we intend to observe the safety/tolerability and efficacy of bortezomib-based regimens in Chinese patients with relapsed/refractory MM. Methods: This was a multicenter, open-label, phase IV observational study for patients with relapsed or refractory MM. Bortezomib (0.7 to 1.6 mg/m2 i.v.) was given on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of a 21-day cycle, for a maximum of 8 cycles, combined with other agents, mainly of dexamethasone addition. If pyretic neutropenia, grade 4 hematologic adverse events (AEs), or grade ≥3 non-hematologic AEs developed, bortezomib treatment was temporarily discontinued and re-administered at 75% of the initial dosage after remittance of the AEs. Responses were classified mainly by European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria (EBMT). Results: Between Mar 2006 and May 2007, 223 patients with MM were enrolled at 31 medical centers. Median age was 58 years (range 35–82), 96% of patients were in stage II/III, and the most common subtype was IgG (46%). Patients had received various prior therapies such as VAD (29% of patients), VBMCP (M2) (16%), and thalidomide combinations (15%). There were 198 patients evaluable for response, of whom 54 (27%) achieved a complete response (CR), 99 (50%) achieved a partial response (PR), 20 (10%) had minimal response (MR), 16 (8%) had stable disease (SD), and the other 9 (5%) had progressive disease (PD). Patients who received 4 or more cycles of bortezomib achieved a higher CR rate (56%) compared with patients who received fewer cycles (partly due to adverse event). Rapid responses were seen with the median time to response being 1 cycle (range 1–5). Common predictive factors including age, isotype, number of previous therapies, concentration of C-reactive protein, or beta2-microglobulin had no significant influence on treatment response. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was 54%, including 18% of patients with hematologic AEs (33% of them grade 3–4), 27% with gastrointestinal AEs (50% of them grade 3–4), and 20% with peripheral neuropathy (40% of them grade 3–4). Serious AEs occurred in 25 (11%) patients. Most AEs were predictable and manageable. Conclusions: These data demonstrate that a bortezomib-based regimen is a promising regimen with high response rate and is well tolerated in most relapsed and refractory MM patients. Additional clinical trials and long-term follow-up on Chinese patients are warranted.

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 5179-5179
Author(s):  
Zhi-Xiang Shen ◽  
Hua Yan ◽  
Linna Wang

Abstract Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma-cell malignancy and overall survival for patients who have relapsed after initial therapy is approximately 2 years. Bortezomib (VELCADE TM) is a first-in-class proteasome inhibitor that has demonstrated significant anti-tumor activity in MM patients. Here we report the results of an observational study of the efficacy and safety of bortezomib-based regimens in Chinese relapsed/refractory MM patients. Methods: This was a multi-center, open-label, phase IV observational study designed to enroll 550 patients with relapsed or refractory MM. From Mar 2006 to May 2008, 500 patients with relapsed or refractory MM were enrolled from 43 medical centers in China and 395 of them were evaluated. Bortezomib (0.7 to 1.6 mg/m2 i.v.) was given on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 in in a 21-day cycle, up to a maximum of 8 cycles, combined with other agents, mainly with the addition of dexamethasone (60.1%). Major endpoint included response rate, safety and time to response. Responses of 62% patients were determined by European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria (EBMT). Bortezomib withheld if patients developed neutropenia fever, grade 4 haematologic adverse events (AEs), or grade 3 non-haematologic AEs, and re-administered at 75% of the initial dosage after recovery. Results: In 395 evaluable cases, the median age was 59 years (range 35–82) and the male/female ratio was 1.5:1. 90% of patients were in late stage(stage II/III) and 50% of them were IgG subtype. Patients had received various prior therapies before bortezomib treatment, including VAD (31.3%), VBMCP (M2, 15.1%) and thalidomide-based regimens(14.9%), with best response rate of 10.4% complete response (CR) and 42.3% partial response (PR) from prior therapies. 311 (82%) cases of patients received 1.0–1.4mg/m2 bortezomib-based regimens treatment and 38.5% of them received at least 4 cycles of treatment. 364 patients were evaluable for response, the overall response rate was 287/364 (78.8%), 89 patients (24.5%) achieved a CR, 30(8.24%) had a nearly complete response (nCR), 168 (46.2%) had a PR, 39 (10.7%) had minimal response (MR), 24 (6.6%) had stable disease (SD), and the other 14 (3.9%) had progressive disease (PD). Median time to response was 1 cycle of treatment (range 1–6). Patients who received 4 or more cycles of bortezomib treatment achieved a higher response rate (CR+PR: 81.5%) compared to those who received fewer cycles (partly due to adverse events). And prognosis-related analysis showed that the dosage of bortezomib at 1.0 mg/m2 or more had a significant influence on the time to response and response rate, but no obvious effect on response duration, time to progress or the survival time. Drug related adverse events (AEs) were reported in 50.4% of patients during treatment, including hematologic AEs (mainly thrombocytopenia, 22.5%), gastrointestinal AEs (24.8%), and peripheral neuropathy (22.5%). The rates of grade 3–4 AEs of them were 46.1%, 11.2% and 15.7%, respectively. Serious AEs occurred in 33 (8.4%) cases and 23 (70%) patients recovered finally. Most AEs were predictable and manageable. Conclusion: Bortezomib-based regimen is effective treatment with higher response rate and is well tolerated in most Chinese patients with relapsed and refractory MM patients. Long-term follow-up is continuing.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (S1) ◽  
pp. 36-37
Author(s):  
Pei Wang ◽  
Jing Li ◽  
Yang Yang ◽  
Peng Liu

IntroductionThe treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), a common hematological malignancy, remains a great challenge in China, partially due to the limited accessibility to novel agents and inadequate public health insurance coverage. Ixazomib, a novel oral proteasome inhibitor (PI), was approved by the China Food and Drug Administration (CFDA) for RRMM in 2018. While bortezomib, a traditional PI, is the recommended agent in the clinical guideline for MM. Here, we compared their costs and effectiveness.MethodsRRMM patients who has received an ixazomib-based regimen (at least 2 cycles) were analyzed. Using a propensity score matching method, we generated a control group of RRMM patients who received the bortezomib-based regimen. The criteria included the number of treatment lines, age, and the revised international staging system stage (R-ISS) which representing the disease stage for myeloma, and paired at a ratio of 1:2 (allowing one control to match multiples). The difference in hospitalization stay, grade 3/4 adverse events rates, overall response rate (ORR), mortality during treatment, and treatment costs was then compared.ResultsNineteen patients received ixazomib and twenty-seven that received bortezomib were included. The ixazomib-group demonstrated a shorter hospital stay (9 days versus 27 days, p < 0.001), lower grade 3–4 adverse events rates (42.1% versus 55.6%, p < 0.001), higher ORR (63.2% versus 48.1%, p = 0.228), and lower mortality rate during treatment (0% versus 7.4%, p = 0.169) than that of bortezomib-group. The ixazomib group had lower total costs (127,620CNY versus 156,424CNY [18,033USD versus 22,103USD], p > 0.05), lower drug costs (98,376CNY versus 103,307CNY [13,901USD versus 14,598USD], p > 0.05), and the lower costs of supportive treatment (5,507CNY versus 14,701 CNY [778USD versus 2,077USD], p < 0.001). Only in terms of self-funded costs, the bortezomib-based regimen was significantly lower (37,127CNY versus 11,521CNY [5,246USD versus 1,628USD], p < 0.001).ConclusionsCompared with the bortezomib-based regimen, the ixazomib-based regimen has better therapeutic effects on MM patients while saving costs. Hence, it may be preferable for use in the treatment of RRMM in China.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 39-40
Author(s):  
Hang Quach ◽  
Simon J Harrison ◽  
Je-Jung Lee ◽  
Nichloas Murphy ◽  
Jae Hoon Lee ◽  
...  

Background: The combination of carfilzomib with immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and dexamethasone is active in multiple myeloma (MM). Carfilzomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (KTd) has been studied in upfront MM treatment but has not been studied in the setting of relapsed/refractory myeloma (RRMM). The ALLG MM018/ AMN002 is an open-label phase II study of KTd in patients with RRMM. This study was conducted across 16 sites across Australia, New-Zealand, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan. Method: Patients with RRMM with 1-3 prior lines of treatment were given carfilzomib [K: 20mg/m2 IV cycle 1 days 1 and 2, 56mg/m2 (36mg/m2 for patients age ≥75 years) from cycle 1 day 8 onwards], thalidomide (T: 100mg po nocte) and dexamethasone [dex: 40mg (20mg for patients age ≥75 years) po weekly], in a 28-day cycle. After 12 cycles, T was omitted, and K was given on days 1,2,15,16 and dex days 1,15 every 28-day cycles for a further six cycles. The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints were ORR, overall survival, adverse events, and quality of life (QoL). The study had an 80% power to detect a ≥70% PFS at 6.5 months compared to historical ≤50% PFS at 6.5 months expected with Td (Kropff, M. et al. Haematologica 2012), at a significance level of 0.05. Results: This study has completed accrual. Eighty-three patients [median age of 66 years (42-85)] were enrolled with a median follow up of 15.9 (0.9-26) months. ORR rates were 86.4% (≥VGPR 70.2%). Median PFS was 20m (95% CI 15.9-26m). PFS at 6.5 months was 76.2% (95% CI 73.6-84.9%). Median OS has not been reached, and was 75% at 20 months. The most common grade ≥3/4 AEs were peripheral neuropathy (16%), upper respiratory tract infections (12%), dyspnoea (14%), and hypertension (10%). Grade ≥3/4 cardiac AEs occurred in 6%. The median carfilzomib dose that was delivered was 70.7% (32.8-92.6%) of the target dose. Thus far, 41% of patients have completed the intended 18 cycles of treatment. 21% of patients ceased therapy early. The most common reason for early treatment cessation was disease progression (30%) and adverse events (15%). Fifteen patients (18%) have died, 11 were due to MM, two from infection, one from an ischaemic cardiac event, and one from a traffic accident. QoL, as measured by the EQ-5D-5L instrument, remained stable throughout treatment. Conclusion: The ALLG MM018/AMN 002 study has met its primary endpoint. The KTd schedule as outlined in this study is efficacious in patients with RRMM, resulting in a prolonged PFS and a safety profile in line with previous reports for each of carfilzomib and thalidomide. KTd is an active option in jurisdictions where the cost of other IMiDs prohibits regulatory funding. Comparisons of efficacy and adverse events between the Caucasian and Asian populations will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Quach: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Glaxo Kline Smith: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding. Harrison:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; CRISPR Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Patents & Royalties: wrt panobinostat; Haemalogix: Consultancy. Augustson:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Campbell:Amgen, Novartis, Roche, Janssen, Celgene (BMS): Research Funding; AstraZeneca, Janssen, Roche, Amgen, CSL Behring, Novartis: Consultancy. Soo:Hanmi: Research Funding. Durie:Amgen, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, and Takeda: Consultancy.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 2958-2958 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenming Chen ◽  
Jian Hou ◽  
Yaozhong Zhao ◽  
Lugui Qiu ◽  
Xiaoyan Ke ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 2958 Background: Circularly permuted TRAIL (CPT) is a recombinant mutant of human Apo2L/TRAIL developed by Beijing Sunbio Biotech Co. Ltd. as a targeted therapy for multiple myeloma and other hematologic malignancies. CPT is a dual pro-apoptotic receptor agonist that directly activates both pro-apoptotic receptors TRAIL-R1 (DR4) and TRAIL-R2 (DR5). CPT selectively induces apoptosis in a variety of cancer cells, while sparing most normal cells in preclinical models. Objective: CPT as a mono-therapy has shown definitive activities for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (Rel/Ref MM) in phase I and phase II studies. The aim of this study is to observe the effect and safety of CPT in combination with thalidomide for Rel/Ref MM patients. Methods: In this multiple-center, open-label, single arm phase II study, 43 Rel/Ref MM patients who had received prior therapies and were resistant to thalidomide were recruited. These patients were divided into three groups, and received CPT 5.0mg/kg, 8.0mg/kg, and 10.0mg/kg on days1–5 of each 21-day cycle, respectively, until having finished six cycle‘s treatment or progression disease or intolerant adverse events. All the patients received thalidomide 100mg daily until to the disease progression or intolerant adverse events. Clinical responses of CPT were assessed by an independent review committee according to the criteria of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT). Results: Among the 43 patients, 41 patients can be evaluated. There were 11, 15 and 15 patients in the three groups respectively. Among the 41 patients, two patients achieved complete response (CR), three showed near complete responses (nCR), four exhibited partial responses (PR), and five obtained minor responses (MR). The total response rates were 34% (including MR or better than MR), or 22% (including PR or better than PR). Among the three groups, the dose of 10mg/kg seemed to be optimal with 26.7% response rate (including PR or better than PR), superior to the other two groups. Duration of response of CPT was not evaluated accurately, because most patients who achieved PR, nCR, or CR were progression free at the end of the trial. The common treatment related adverse events (≥10%) were neutropenia, leucopoenia, fever, AST/ALT/LDH elevation, and thrombocytopenia. The grade 3 non-haematological toxicities were AST elevation (4.65%) and LDH elevation (2.33%). The elevation of AST and LDH seems to be related to tumor lysis, but not to liver injury. The grade 4 haematological toxicities were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia (2.33%, respectively) which might be related to thalidomide. Conclusions: The CPT combined with thalidomide was well-tolerated and an effective regimen for the treatment of Rel/Ref MM. The combination of CPT and thalidomide seems to be superior to CPT alone in CR/nCR response rate. Disclosures: Zheng: Beijing Sunbio Biotech Co., Ltd.: Employment. Zhu:Beijing Sunbio Biotech Co., Ltd.: Employment. Yang:Beijing Sunbio Biotech Co., Ltd.: Employment.


2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10679-10679
Author(s):  
B. Xu ◽  
L. Tian ◽  
Q. Wu ◽  
M. Zhou ◽  
H. Wang ◽  
...  

10679 Background: Breast cancer is one of the most common malignancies among Chinese women and the incidence continues to rise, particularly in large cities such as Shanghai. X monotherapy is consistently effective and very well tolerated in pretreated MBC. N is also commonly used in this indication. In several studies, the combination of X + N led to response rates ranging from 43–67% in first-line MBC. As there are few data on this combination in pretreated MBC, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of X + N in Chinese pts with MBC refractory to anthracycline or taxane treatment in a phase II trial. Methods: 77 pts of a planned population of 60 pts were enrolled between Feb 2003 and Nov 2004. All pts had measurable MBC (WHO) recurrent after anthracycline or taxane treatment, Karnofsky PS ≥60, adequate bone marrow, renal and hepatic function. Pts received 3-weekly cycles of oral X 1000mg/m2 bid d1–14 + i.v. N 25mg/m2 d1&8, for at least 2 cycles. Pts with progressive disease went off study while those with complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD) continued treatment for a maximum of 6 cycles. Results: Baseline characteristics of the 77 pts evaluable to date: median age 51 years (range 29–68); median Karnofsky PS 90 (range 70–100). Previous chemotherapy was: anthracycline (87%), paclitaxel/docetaxel (52%). Principal tumor sites were: lung (40%), liver (39%), lymph nodes (33%), thoracic wall (12%), breast (7%), other (3%). All pts received at least 2 cycles, 20 received 4 cycles and 47 received 6 cycles. The overall response rate was 22%, including 5 CR and 12 PR. At a median follow-up of 6 months (95% CI, 4.2–9.0), the median time to progression (TTP) is 6 months (95% CI, 3.5–9.0). The most common (≥10% pts) treatment-related grade 1/2 adverse events were: HFS (16%), nausea (12%), and SGPT abnormality (10%). Most adverse events improved or resolved after dose adjustment and/or suitable treatments. There were very few grade 3/4 adverse events, the most common being leucopenia (12%). Conclusions: X + N is active in pretreated MBC and its efficacy is confirmed in this study in Chinese pts. The combination is also well tolerated. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yali Tao ◽  
Hui Zhou ◽  
Ting Niu

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.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 5629-5629
Author(s):  
Sharoon Samuel ◽  
Muhammad Junaid Tariq ◽  
Muhammad Usman ◽  
Amna Khalid ◽  
Muhammad Asad Fraz ◽  
...  

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.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 755-755 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuqin Song ◽  
Yongping Song ◽  
Lihong Liu ◽  
Mingzhi Zhang ◽  
Zhiming Li ◽  
...  

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), a subtype of aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), remains challenging with unsatisfied outcomes from standard therapy. The clinical significance of Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase (BTK) inhibitors has been validated in multiple subtypes of NHL. Ibrutinib, the first BTK inhibitor, has been approved by FDA for the treatment of refractory and relapse (r/r) MCL. In spite of encouraging efficacy, clinically often referred adverse events such as diarrhea, bleeding and atrial fibrillation, respectively following ibrutinib treatment. It has been hypothesized that poor target selectivity (inhibitive effect on EGFR, TEC, BMX and others) may partially explain the occurrence of these adverse events. As such, there are focused efforts to develop new BTK inhibitor with high target selectivity aiming to improve the safety. Orelabrutinib (ICP-022) is a novel, potent irreversible BTK inhibitor with high selectivity for BTK vs other kinases including TEC- and EGFR-family members. Results from Phase I study demonstrated excellent safety/tolerability profiles as well as favorable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties. Sustained BTK occupancy at 24 hr was achieved with once daily dosing regimen. In this presentation, we describe the clinical results of orelabrutinib in Chinese patients with r/r MCL. This is an open-label, multicenter, two stages, phase II study. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) and the duration of response (DOR) and safety were chosen as secondary endpoints. The stage I was designed for regimen selection (RP2D, N=20 for 100 mg, bid and 150 mg, qd each, respectively), while the stage II for efficacy at RP2D (N=86 150 mg, qd). Response was assessed per Lugano criteria (2014). Total of 106 pts with r/r MCL were enrolled. As of 31 May 2019, sixty-two pts had completed six cycles of treatment (28 days/cycle). The median duration of treatment was 197.5 days. Safety: A total of 106 pts were enrolled and treated at 22 centers in China. The most frequent (&gt;15%) adverse events (AEs) of any cause were mostly hematological toxicities including thrombocytopenia and neutropenia; and respiratory system infections as well as rash. The frequently reported (&gt;10%) grade 3 or higher AEs of any cause were thrombocytopenia (12.3%). No grade 2 or higher hemorrhage was reported. No treatment related grade 3 GI or cardio toxicity was observed. Of the 106 patients, twenty-five experienced serious AEs and 13 of them were treatment-related (primarily occurred as hematologic toxicities and / or infections). Efficacy: Forty patients, divided into two cohorts (n=20 each), were enrolled in stage I. The regimen, 150 mg, qd, was selected as RP2D based on a better ORR and the convenience of once daily dosing. All patients who were enrolled in the stage I continued their treatment. At the time of reporting (the 31 May 2019), 97 patients had response assessments. The response rate was assessed by traditional CT image technology. The ORR was 82.5% (80/97) for combining both regimens with the complete response rate (CR) 24.7% (24/97), partial responses 57.7% (56/97). Stable disease was seen in 9.3% (9/97). The total disease control rate is 91.8%. Six (6.2%) patients progressed by the first response assessment. The median duration of response rate (DOR) has not been reached. Conclusion: Orelabrutinib is safe and well tolerated with no reported treatment related grade 3 or higher GI toxicity, atrial fibrillation/flutter and severe bleeding in this study. Orelabrutinib is efficacious to treat patients with r/r MCL. The improved safety, resulting from high target selectivity, and the convenience of daily dosing regimen provides orelabrutinib as the potential of preferred therapeutic choice for B cell malignancy. Disclosures Lu: Beijing InnoCare Pharma Tech. Co., Ltd.: Employment. Zhang:Beijing InnoCare Pharma Tech Co., Ltd: Employment. Zhao:Beijing InnoCare Pharma Tech Co., Ltd: Employment. Xu:Beijing InnoCare Pharma Tech Co., Ltd: Employment.


Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 4839-4839 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Foa ◽  
Donna Weber ◽  
Meletios Dimopoulos ◽  
Marta Olesnyckyj ◽  
Zhinuan Yu ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Historically, patients with IgA multiple myeloma (MM) respond poorly to treatment. In 2 recent phase III trials, Lenalidomide (Len) in combination with Dexamethasone (Dex) led to an overall response (OR) rate of approximately 60% (61% in MM-009 and 60% in MM-010), a complete response (CR) rate of about 15% (14% and 16%, respectively), an overall survival (OS) of at least 29.5 months (29.5 and not yet reached), and a median time to progression (TTP) of at least 11.1 months (11.1 months and 11.3 months, respectively) in patients with relapsed/refractory MM. In both studies, OR, CR, OS and TTP were significantly better with Len/Dex than with Dex alone. Here, we assess the impact of IgA disease on the efficacy and tolerability of treatment with Len/Dex versus Dex alone. Methods: Data were pooled from the MM-009 and MM-010 studies. Patients were randomized to receive Len (25 mg/day on days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle) or placebo. Both groups received Dex 40mg PO q.d. on days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20 (for the first four cycles). After four cycles, Dex 40 mg/day was administered only on days 1–4. Response to therapy, TTP, OS, and adverse events were assessed. Response rate and TTP were based on data obtained before unblinding (June 2005 [MM-009] and August 2005 [MM-010]). Results: Of 154 patients with IgA at baseline, 72 were treated with Len/Dex and 82 with Dex alone. Among those without IgA, 281 received Len/Dex and 269 received Dex alone. Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment groups. Len/Dex was associated with a significantly higher OR and longer median TTP than Dex alone in patients with and without IgA (Table). In the non-IgA group, patients treated with Len/Dex had a significantly longer OS than those treated with Dex alone. Response, TTP and OS were comparable between IgA and non-IgA patient groups. There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between patients with and without IgA. Among those with IgA, the most common grade 3–4 adverse events with Len/Dex and Dex alone were neutropenia (37.5% and 2.4%), thrombocytopenia (16.7% and 8.5%), and anemia (11.1% and 7.3%). The respective rates for patients without IgA were 46.5% and 14.5%, 12.1% and 5.7%, and 11.0% and 5.7%. Conclusion: In patients with and in those without IgA MM, Len/Dex treatment induces a high response rate and a prolonged TTP compared with Dex. IgA non-IgA Clinical response, % Len/Dex (n=72) Dex alone (n=82) P Len/Dex (n=281) Dex alone (n=269) P OR 68.1 18.3 <0.001 57.7 23.0 <0.001 CR 18.1 0 NS 14.2 2.6 NS PR 38.9 15.9 NS 35.6 19.3 NS Median TTP, wks 44.3 16.4 <0.001 52.1 20.1 <0.001 Median OS, wks 130.4 102.4 NS 156.0 136.1 <0.05


Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 868-868 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Patrizia Falco ◽  
Grazia Sanpaolo ◽  
Antonietta Falcone ◽  
Vincenzo Ferderico ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: In newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients the addition of lenalidomide or thalidomide or bortezomib to the standard oral melphalan and prednisone (MP) combination significantly increased response rate and event-free survival. In advanced MM, the 4 drug combination VMPT further improves response rate. In this multicenter open label phase I/II trial the safety/efficacy profile of the 4 drug combination, lenalidomide, melphalan, prednisone and thalidomide (RMPT) was evaluated in patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma. Methods: Oral lenalidomide was administered at 10 mg/day on days 1–21, oral melphalan at 0.18 mg/kg on days 1–4, oral prednisone at 2 mg/kg on days 1–4. Thalidomide was administered at 50 mg/day (Arm A) or 100 mg/day (Arm B) on days 1–28. Each course was repeated every 28 days for a total of 6 courses. Aspirin 100 mg/day was given as a prophylaxis for thrombosis. Maintenance therapy included lenalidomide alone at 10 mg/day on days 1–21. Results: Forthy-four patients, median age 69 years (range 47–80), with relapsed or refractory MM were enrolled. Twenty-six patients received RMPT as second line of therapy, 18 as third line. Twenty patients received prior autologous transplant, 10 thalidomide-based regimen, 9 bortezomib-based regimen and 3 allogeneic stem cell transplant. After a median of 2 courses, 75.8% of patients achieved at least a partial response (PR), including 30% very good partial response (VGPR). Among patients who received RMPT as second line therapy the PR rate was 81.8%, including VGPR 36.4%.Among patients who received thalidomide 100 mg, the PR rate was 93.3% (including VGPR 46.7%) compared to 64.7% of thalidomide 50 mg. The 1-year-progressionfree survival was 48.6% and the 1-year survival from study entry was 90%. Grade 3–4 hematologic adverse events included: neutropenia (66.6%), thrombocytopenia (36.3%) and anemia (30.2%). Grade 3–4 non hematologic adverse events included: infections (21.2%), neurological toxicity (6%) and fatigue (9%). No thromboembolic events were reported. Conclusion: Initial results showed that RMPT is an effective salvage therapy with a high proportion of responses. Toxicities were manageable. No thromboembolic complications were reported.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document