Bortezomib (Velcade ™) Observational Study in China: Efficacy and Safety of Bortezomib-Based Regimen in 395 Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma Patients

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.

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.


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 < 0.00001) compared to SEL + DEX treatment, and lower PDR (4 vs 23%, p < 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 < 0.00001), nausea (72 vs 52%, p < 0.00001), vomiting (41 vs 23%, p < 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 < 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 ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 3690-3690 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Teresa Petrucci ◽  
Igor W. Blau ◽  
Paolo Corradini ◽  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Johannes Drach ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Bortezomib has been shown to be effective in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). However, the data on response to re-treatment with bortezomib is very limited, mostly coming from small retrospective studies. Response to re-treatment is particularly relevant in patients with relapsing incurable conditions such as MM. The primary objective of this first international prospective phase II trial was to determine the best response to bortezomib re-treatment in patients with MM. Secondary objectives included safety profile, duration of response, time to progression, best M protein response and the evaluation of the best investigator-assessed response compared to the best response reported to the previous bortezomib treatment. Methods: Patients with secretory MM were eligible if they had responded (CR or PR) to a bortezomib-based most recent treatment and had a treatment-free interval of at least 6 months since the last bortezomib dose. They needed to meet the PD criteria as defined by European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT). Patients received bortezomib starting at the last tolerated dose in the previous bortezomib regimen (1.3 or 1.0 mg/m2). Bortezomib was administered alone or in combination with dexamethasone at investigator discretion. Bortezomib was administered as an intravenous injection on days 1, 4, 8 and 11 of a 21-day cycle up to a maximum of 8 cycles. Response was evaluated every 6 weeks according to EBMT criteria. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed from informed consent until at least 30 days after treatment and were graded by the NCI-CTCAE. This clinical trial closed to recruitment on 30th June 2008 after reaching the planned sample size of 128 patients, with 57 patients still receiving treatment. The results presented include the efficacy and safety data available for 100 patients who had completed at least 2 treatment cycles at the time of data cut-off (16 July 2008) or who had withdrawn from therapy for any reason. Results: The 100 patients (M: 59, F: 41; median age 66 years) who received at least 1 dose of bortezomib are included in the current safety analysis. The median time from diagnosis of MM was 4.5 years (range 0–14 years) and 59% had received 3 or more lines of prior therapy (including the previous bortezomib therapy). Karnofsky performance status was £ 70% in 16% of patients. Twenty-six percent of patients had achieved a complete response (CR) with the last bortezomib regimen. The median treatment free interval since the previous bortezomib treatment was 14.3 months. Eighty-seven percent of the patients received at least 3 cycles and the median number of completed cycles was 5 cycles. Dexamethasone was added to the bortezomib treatment in 69% of patients. In the 97 patients eligible for the current efficacy analysis, the overall response rate (ORR) by EBMT criteria [CR+PR] was 26.8% (CI=18.3– 36.8), with 3.1% complete responses, whilst ORR + minimal response (MR) was 46.4%. The ORR did not differ in patients treated with bortezomib plus dexamethasone (27.9%, CI=17.7– 40.1) versus those treated with bortezomib alone (24.1%, CI=10.3–43.5). The median time to at least PR was 43 days, with a median time to best response of 64 days. The most commonly reported related grade 3/4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (24%), neutropenia (5%) and diarrhea (5%). Peripheral neuropathy (PN) was observed in 20% of patients, with grade 3 PN reported in 6% of patients only. Serious TEAE’s were reported in 23% of patients and 10% of patients discontinued bortezomib due to related TEAE’s including 6 cases of PN. TEAE’s leading to death were reported in three patients. Conclusions: Response after re-treatment with bortezomib alone or in combination with dexamethasone in heavily pre-treated multiple myeloma patients was still high, and the adverse event profile was consistent with the already known safety profile. Updated results will be presented at time of the meeting.


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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (8) ◽  
pp. 030006052110381
Author(s):  
Yin Wang ◽  
Yanqing Li ◽  
Ye Chai

Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination regimens containing daratumumab in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Methods A systematic search of publications listed on electronic databases (PubMed®, The Cochrane Library, Science Direct and Web of Science) between inception and 13 November 2020 was conducted to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included patients with MM that were treated with combination regimens containing daratumumab. Results A total of seven RCTs were included ( n = 4268 patients). Meta-analysis showed that compared with the control group, the group containing daratumumab showed a significantly better overall response rate and a complete response or better. Daratumumab improved efficacy in both standard-risk and cytogenetically high-risk patients with MM. The prevalence of neutropenia (≥grade 3) and pneumonia was significantly higher in the daratumumab group compared with the control group. Conclusion The available evidence demonstrated that the clinical application of combination regimens containing daratumumab improved the efficacy in patients with MM and had acceptable safety.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (10) ◽  
pp. 1006-1018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim-Hien T. Dao ◽  
Jason Gotlib ◽  
Michael M.N. Deininger ◽  
Stephen T. Oh ◽  
Jorge E. Cortes ◽  
...  

PURPOSE Colony-stimulating factor-3 receptor ( CSF3R)-T618I is a recurrent activating mutation in chronic neutrophilic leukemia (CNL) and to a lesser extent in atypical chronic myeloid leukemia (aCML) resulting in constitutive JAK-STAT signaling. We sought to evaluate safety and efficacy of the JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib in patients with CNL and aCML, irrespective of CSF3R mutation status. METHODS We conducted a phase II study of ruxolitinib in 44 patients (21 CNL and 23 aCML). The primary end point was overall hematologic response rate (ORR) by the end of 6 continuous 28-day cycles for the first 25 patients enrolled. We considered a response as either partial (PR) or complete response (CR). We expanded accrual to 44 patients to increase our ability to evaluate secondary end points, including grade ≥ 3 adverse events, spleen volume, symptom assessment, genetic correlates of response, and 2-year survival. RESULTS ORR was 32% for the first 25 enrolled patients (8 PR [7 CNL and 1 aCML]). In the larger cohort of 44 patients, 35% had a response (11 PR [9 CNL and 2 aCML] and 4 CR [CNL]), and 50% had oncogenic CSF3R mutations. The mean absolute allele burden reduction of CSF3R-T618I after 6 cycles was greatest in the CR group, compared with the PR and no response groups. The most common cause of death is due to disease progression. Grade ≥ 3 anemia and thrombocytopenia were observed in 34% and 14% of patients, respectively. No serious adverse events attributed to ruxolitinib were observed. CONCLUSION Ruxolitinib was well tolerated and demonstrated an estimated response rate of 32%. Patients with a diagnosis of CNL and/or harboring CSF3R-T618I were most likely to respond.


2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shenghao Wu ◽  
Cuiping Zheng ◽  
Songyan Chen ◽  
Xiaoping Cai ◽  
Yuejian Shi ◽  
...  

Objective. To investigate the efficacy and safety of the treatment of the newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients with the therapy of subcutaneous (subQ) administration of bortezomib and dexamethasone plus thalidomide (VTD) regimen.Methods. A total of 60 newly diagnosed MM patients were analyzed. 30 patients received improved VTD regimen (improved VTD group) with the subQ injection of bortezomib and the other 30 patients received conventional VTD regimen (VTD group).The efficacy and safety of two groups were analyzed retrospectively.Results. The overall remission (OR) after eight cycles of treatment was 73.3% in the VTD group and 76.7% in the improved VTD group (P>0.05). No significant differences in time to 1-year estimate of overall survival (72% versus 75%,P=0.848) and progression-free survival (median 22 months versus 25 months;P=0.725) between two groups. The main toxicities related to therapy were leukopenia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, asthenia, fatigue, and renal and urinary disorders. Grade 3 and higher adverse events were significantly less common in the improved VTD group (50%) than VTD group (80%,P=0.015).Conclusions. The improved VTD regimen by changing bortezomib from intravenous administration to subcutaneous injection has noninferior efficacy to standard VTD regimen, with an improved safety profile and reduced adverse events.


Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 55-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Maria Teresa Petrucci ◽  
Antonietta Falcone ◽  
Anna Marina Liberati ◽  
...  

Abstract Several trials have shown the superior impact of high-dose melphalan (usually 200 mg/m2, MEL200) versus standard therapy in myeloma patients. Intermediate-dose melphalan (100 mg/m2, MEL100) was also superior to the standard dose, but MEL100 has not been clinically compared with MEL200 in a randomized study. In a case-matched study, response rate and event-free survival of MEL200 were superior to MEL100, but overall survival (OS) was similar. In this prospective, randomized, phase III trial, we compared the efficacy and toxicity of MEL200 and MEL100. Between January 2002 and July 2006, 299 patients were enrolled. Inclusion criteria were previously untreated myeloma, aged < 65 and Durie and Salmon stage II or III. Exclusion criteria were abnormal cardiac function, respiratory disease, abnormal liver function, abnormal renal function, HBV, HCV, or HIV positivity, concomitant cancer or psychiatric disease. The institutional review board approved the protocol and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. All patients received: 2 dexamethasone-doxorubicin-vincristine debulking courses (doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 day 1, vincristine 1 mg day 1, dexamethasone 40 mg days 1, 2, 3, 4, each course repeated every 28 days), 2 cycles of cyclophosphamide (4 g/m2, day 1) plus G-CSF followed by stem cell harvest. The MEL200 group was conditioned with 2 cycles of melphalan 200 mg/m2 followed by stem cell reinfusion; the MEL100 group was conditioned with 2 courses of melphalan 100 mg/m2 followed by stem cell reinfusion. At the present, 246 patients, median age 57 (range 32–65), completed the assigned therapy and were evaluated for response, progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. One-hundred and twenty-four patients were randomized to MEL200 and 122 to MEL100. Patient characteristics were similar in both groups. Abnormal cytogenetics (13q deletion, t(4;14), t(11;14), p53) were 75% in MEL200 patients and 56% in MEL100 patients (p=0.05). Forty-six patients did not complete tandem MEL200; 36 patients did not complete tandem MEL100. The near complete response rate of MEL200 was superior to MEL100 (32% versus 18%, p=0.011), but partial response was 80% versus 71%, respectively (p=0.079). The median follow-up for censored patients was 26.5 months. The 3 years PFS was 51% in the MEL200 arm and 33% in the MEL100 arm (HR=0.81, 95% CI 0.55–1.21, p=0.31). The 3 years OS was 86% in the MEL200 group and 71% in the MEL100 group (HR=0.82, 95 CI 0.45–1.48, p=0.51). Duration of grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia was comparable in two arms, but MEL200 patients required more platelet transfusions (p=0.03). Grade 3–4 non-hematological adverse events were reported in 49% of the MEL200 patients and in 38% of the MEL100 patients (P=0.07). The most frequent grade 3–4 adverse events were infections (54% of MEL200 patients versus 45% of MEL100 patients, p=0.25), mucositis (31% of MEL200 patients versus 7% of MEL100 patients, p=0.002) and gastrointestinal toxicities (20% of MEL200 patients versus 14% of MEL100 patients, p=0.3). In conclusion, MEL200 resulted in a significantly higher near complete response rate but this did not translate in a superior PFS and OS.


Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 4827-4827
Author(s):  
Zhen Cai ◽  
Weiyan Zheng ◽  
Guoqing Wei ◽  
Xiujin Ye ◽  
Jingsong He ◽  
...  

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.


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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document