The Outcome of Different Types of Second-Line Therapy in Multiple Myeloma Patients Relapsing After Uniform Front-Line Treatment with High-Dose Melphalan and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 2892-2892
Author(s):  
Claudia Crippa ◽  
Samantha Ferrari ◽  
Monica Drera ◽  
Marinella Calarco ◽  
Antonio Regazzoli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
High Dose Melphalan

Abstract Abstract 2892 Poster Board II-868 Background and aim. While multiple myeloma (MM) still remains largely incurable, therapeutic options for patients with MM are expanding. However the best way to use the different effective regimens, either in combination or in sequence, during the course of MM in the single patient is still unknown. Data from controlled studies rarely report the treatments received before and after the enrollment of patients in the clinical trial, which may significantly impact on response and survival. As an example, the best treatment for patients relapsing after first-line high-dose melphalan (HD-Mel) and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is not standardized. To this end we have retrospectively analyzed an uniform cohort of such patients treated at our Institution, comparing their outcome according to the type of second-line and further consolidation treatment received. Patients and methods. In 156 patients affected by MM and treated between 1997 and 2008 with HD-Mel and ASCT as first line therapy, relapse has occurred in 92 (59%). Females were 39 (42%), males 53 (58%), median age was 60 (range 34-75). As induction therapy before ASCT, 89 (97%) had received VAD regimen, and only 3 (3%) thalidomide/bortezomib-based regimen. Sixty-one patients (66%) had received a single ASCT and 31 a double ASCT (34%). A second-line therapy was given to 87/92 patients. They were subdivided in 3 subgroups according to the type of second-line treatment received: 1) thalidomide-based regimens (THAL) were given to 55 pts (63%) followed by a consolidation ASCT in 13 (24%) 2) bortezomib-based regimens (BORT) were used in 13 (15%) and subsequent ASCT in 3 of them (23%) 3) chemotherapy and/or steroids (CHEMO) were used in 19 (22%) followed by ASCT in 15 (79%). Median follow-up from diagnosis was 57 (13-145) in THAL, 39 (17-140) in BORT and 59 months (25-113) in CHEMO respectively. The baseline characteristics, including age, of the three subgroups were similar as well as the CR/VGPR and ORR rates obtained after first-line treatment (THAL 47% and 87%; BORT 69% and 100%; CHEMO 53% and 100%, respectively). The subgroups also did not differ in median duration of first response, which ranged from 13 to 15 months and median time to second treatment, which was 26 months in all subgroups. The proportion of patients receiving a double ASCT were significantly higher in BORT (69%) compared to THAL (34%) (P=0.03) and CHEMO (5%) (p=0.002), and in THAL (34%) compared to CHEMO (5%) (p=0.015). Results. After second line therapy the ORR (CR+VGPR+ PR) of the three subgroups was: THAL 60%, BORT 77% and CHEMO 58%. (p=NS). The second CR/VGPR rate was non significantly higher after BORT (46%) than after THAL (25%) or CHEMO (21%) (p=0.17). Moreover, when considering patients not undergoing second-line consolidation ASCT, the ORR was significantly better in THAL and BORT subgroups compared to CHEMO (50%, 70% and 0%, respectively p=0.03). After a median follow-up from second-line treatment of 28 months (range 1-99), the 2-y PFS was 38% after THAL (median 18 months), 34% after BORT (median 16 months) and 17% after CHEMO (median 12 months) (p=NS). The 2-y OS was 78% (median 49 months), 70% (median not reached), and 70% (median 33 month) after THAL, BORT and CHEMO, respectively (p=NS). However when considering patients not undergoing second-line consolidation ASCT, the 2-y OS was significantly better after THAL and BORT than after CHEMO (p=0.024). Conclusion. In spite of having frequently received a first-line double ASCT, BORT patients seemed to achieve responses of better quality. However, in patients relapsing after first-line HD-Mel and ASCT, the choice of THAL, BORT or CHEMO-based regimens as second-line therapy did not seem to impact on overall response rates and survival, provided that patients treated with CHEMO could be consolidated with a second ASCT. Hence newer drugs may be reserved for those patients not fit for ASCT, preserving them for effective third-line treatment in the other patients. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Inferior Survival with Use of Autologous Stem Cell Transplant As Second-Line Therapy in Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2026-2026 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cara A. Rosenbaum ◽  
Danny Luan ◽  
Paul J Christos ◽  
Roger Pearse ◽  
Danielle Guarneri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Delayed Group

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable with eventual relapse and death occurring despite multiple lines of chemotherapy. Standard frontline therapy for MM has traditionally consisted of combinations of immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), proteasome inhibitors (PIs), and dexamethasone followed by consolidation with high-dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). A randomized trial using IMiD and PI-based induction demonstrated significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit with upfront ASCT in consolidation compared to ASCT in second-line at relapse, but no OS benefit (Attal et al, NEJM, 2017). Delay of ASCT to second-line or beyond may in part be due to the aforementioned lack of OS benefit shown with upfront ASCT and increase of sustained deep responses, including MRD negativity, to novel frontline 3 and 4-drug regimens and continuation of therapy in the frontline. We performed a chart review comparing PFS1, PFS2, and overall survival (OS) of patients who underwent upfront ASCT as consolidation to those who received ASCT in the second-line after one relapse ('delayed ASCT'). The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Weill Cornell Medical College. Methods: 124 MM patients who underwent ASCT either as consolidation in first-line or delayed ASCT after relapsing on one prior treatment between 2010-2016 were included. Demographics and clinical parameters were extracted from the electronic medical record. PFS1, PFS2, and OS were calculated from date of diagnosis to first relapse, second relapse, and death, respectively. Patients were censored if lost to follow-up prior to experiencing the relevant event. PFS1, PFS2, and OS of patients receiving upfront ASCT were compared to those of patients receiving delayed ASCT. Log-rank tests were used to statistically evaluate differences between Kaplan-Meier PFS/OS curves. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) using upfront ASCT as the reference treatment. Results: Among the 124 patients, 93 underwent upfront ASCT as consolidation and 31 underwent delayed ASCT after relapsing on one prior line of therapy (Table 1). Induction regimens and pre-transplant therapies received are detailed in Table 1. Of the delayed group patients, 6 underwent ASCT directly without second-line induction and 25 as consolidation after second-line therapy. Patients receiving upfront ASCT had significantly longer median PFS1 compared to patients who received delayed ASCT (6.45 vs 1.25 years; P<0.001), with a HR of 0.18 (95% CI, 0.11-0.29) (Figure 1A). Median PFS2 in the upfront ASCT group was likewise significantly longer than in the delayed group (9.19 vs 3.69 years; P<0.001), with a HR of 0.31 (95% CI, 0.18-0.55) (Figure 1B). With a median follow-up of 6.0 and 5.8 years in the upfront and delayed groups, respectively, median OS was not reached in either group but trended towards prolonged survival with upfront ASCT (P=0.052), with a HR of 0.46 (95% CI, 0.20 to 1.03) (Figure 1C). Conclusions: In this cohort of 124 MM patients undergoing ASCT as consolidation in the upfront setting or delayed ASCT in second-line after relapse, upfront ASCT was associated with significantly improved PFS1 and PFS2, similar to findings by Attal et al. However, in that study, no difference in OS was seen between upfront and delayed groups, while our data, with longer follow-up, showed median OS trending towards significance. This has important implications as with use of novel induction regimens and maintenance therapy, ASCT is more commonly being delayed to early relapse in second-line or beyond. If transplant is intended to be used in the first few lines of therapy, our data show that delaying ASCT even to second-line has a significant negative impact on PFS. In addition, a shorter OS with delayed transplant was suggested although did not reach statistical significance, possibly due to small numbers or more patients with high-risk MM in the delayed group. It is also important to note the lack of daratumumab-based regimens which may have improved PFS/OS in either or both arms. Thus, our findings should be prospectively validated in a larger trial of ASCT as consolidation in first-line vs second-line or beyond using novel, monoclonal antibody-based regimens. Disclosures Rosenbaum: Janssen: Research Funding; Honoraria Akcea: Other: Accordant Health. Coleman:Gilead, Bayer, Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership; Merck: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau. Van Besien:Miltenyi Biotec: Research Funding. Niesvizky:Takeda, Amgen, BMS, Janssen, Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Characteristics, treatment patterns, and economic burden of patients with metastatic cervical cancer receiving systemic anticancer therapy.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 51-51
Author(s):  
Xiaoyun Pan ◽  
Lincy S. Lal ◽  
John White ◽  
Seyed Hamidreza Mahmoudpour ◽  
Christian Valencia
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Economic Burden ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Duration Of Treatment ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
Line Therapy

51 Background: In 2021, 14,480 patients are estimated to be diagnosed with cervical cancer in the US; 16% of patients are expected to have metastatic disease for whom the 5-year survival rate is 17.6% per SEER estimates. Patients with metastatic cervical cancer (mCC) are treated mainly with systemic therapy. This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics, demographics, treatment patterns, and economic burden of patients with mCC receiving systemic therapy. Methods: Eligible women had been diagnosed with cervical cancer, as evidenced by >2 outpatient or >1 inpatient claim in the Optum Research Database from January 2014 through January 2020. Patients were included if they had metastasis within 6 months before or after cervical cancer diagnosis, with evidence of systemic treatment on or after the latter of a claim date for cervical cancer disease or metastatic disease. The index date was the first-line treatment initiation date. Patients were required to have ≥6 months of pre-index continuous enrollment. The top 3 treatment regimens and median treatment duration by line of therapy were described. All-cause per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs (2019 US dollars), including plan and patient paid amounts, were reported for full follow-up period from first-line and second-line therapy initiation. Results: The study sample consisted of 778 patients (mean age, 59 years; commercial, 58%; Medicare Advantage, 42%). The mean (median) follow-up period was 14 (9) months. Top baseline comorbidities were diseases of the urinary system (71%) and diseases of the female genital organs (70%), and the median Charlson comorbidity index was 7. In the first line, 80% of patients received platinum-based therapy and 23% received bevacizumab (bev). Of 778 patients, only 294 (38%) received second-line therapy, with 34% receiving bev. Top first-line treatment regimens were carboplatin + paclitaxel (27%), cisplatin (21%), and bev + carboplatin + paclitaxel (10%); the median (95% CI) duration of treatment was 3.4 (3.1-3.7) months. Top second-line treatment regimens were bev + carboplatin + paclitaxel (13%), carboplatin + paclitaxel (11%), and pembrolizumab (6%); the median duration of treatment was 3.8 (3.1-4.2) months. Mean all-cause total PPPM costs were $19,519 from first-line and $22,660 second-line therapy initiation (table). Conclusions: This study indicates that real-world mCC patients have short treatment durations and significant economic burden with first-line and second-line therapy. Novel therapies associated with greater clinical benefits in patients with mCC may provide economic benefit.[Table: see text]

Outcomes in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) who discontinued (DC) first-line nivolumab + ipilimumab (N+I) or sunitinib (S) due to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) in CheckMate 214.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 581-581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nizar M. Tannir ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Elizabeth R. Plimack ◽  
David F. McDermott ◽  
Philippe Barthelemy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Groups ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Study Dose ◽  
Clinical Trial Information

581 Background: The phase 3 CheckMate 214 trial demonstrated superior efficacy for N+I vs S in aRCC, although more patients discontinued N+I compared with S due to TRAEs. This is a post hoc analysis of outcomes in pts who DC N+I or S due to TRAEs. Methods: Untreated pts with clear cell aRCC were randomized 1:1 to N 3 mg/kg + I 1 mg/kg Q3Wx4 (induction) and then N 3 mg/kg Q3W (maintenance), or S 50 mg daily for 4 wk on, 2 wk off (6-wk cycles). This analysis includes all pts who DC due to TRAEs reported during extended follow-up (≤100 d after last study dose). Results: Of 550 N+I randomized pts, 135 (25%) DC due to TRAEs, most commonly increased ALT, diarrhea, and increased AST (all 3%); 64 (12%) of 535 S randomized pts DC due to TRAEs, most commonly increased ALT, diarrhea, and pancreatitis (all 1%). In N+I pts who DC due to TRAEs, 47% DC during N+I induction, 7% completed induction but no N maintenance, and 46% completed induction and received N maintenance (median [range] 8 [1–47] doses). At 30-mo minimum follow-up, ORR per investigator, CR rate, and 24-mo OS rate were higher in pts who DC N+I vs S due to TRAEs. Outcomes in pts who DC S due to TRAEs were similar to those in all S ITT pts and worse than in N+I pts who DC due to TRAEs (Table). At 24 mo, 42% of pts who DC N+I due to TRAEs were alive and free from second-line therapy. Consistent outcomes were seen in pts who DC N+I due to TRAEs across IMDC risk groups (data to be presented). Pts who DC N+I due to TRAEs experienced more immune-related select TRAEs and received more high-dose steroids (≥40 mg prednisone daily or equiv.), but times to onset and resolution and resolution rates of select TRAEs were similar vs all treated N+I pts. Conclusions: Discontinuation of first-line N+I due to TRAEs did not result in impaired outcomes, and a high proportion of pts remain alive and free from second-line therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT02231749. [Table: see text]

Fludarabine, Cyclophosphamide and Rituximab (FCR) Related Prolonged Cytopenia Is Frequent and Adverse Factor Affecting Survival of Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 1790-1790
Author(s):  
Petra Obrtlikova ◽  
Anna Jonasova ◽  
Magda Siskova ◽  
Eduard Cmunt ◽  
Adela Berkova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Abstract 1790 Background: The immunochemotherapy regimen composed of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab (FCR) has emerged as highly effective frontline or second line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). This regimen may be however associated with prolonged cytopenia and the risk of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Aims and methods: In our retrospective single center analysis, we evaluated the efficacy and the toxicity of FC or FCR regimen in unselected population of CLL patients with treatment indication. The overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) was calculated for all patients as intent to treat analysis. The prolonged cytopenia was defined as cytopenia (grade 2–4 according to CTCAE v.4 ) developing during of after the last cycle of FC/FCR and persisting two or more months. Cytopenia was evaluated in patients with follow-up at least 6 months after this treatment. Patients were excluded from analysis of cytopenia if they underwent immediate other treatment (antibody maintenance, high dose therapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) consolidation, or they received other therapy due to unsatisfactory response to FCR). Patients with missing laboratory data after FC(R) were also excluded. Kaplan Maier curves for PFS and OS were calculated and log rank test was used for survival comparison. Results: Altogether, 252 patients started the treatment with FC or FCR in the years 2000–2012 at our institution. There were 86 (34%) women and 166 (66%) men with a median age of 62 years (31–87) at the time of FC(R) therapy. 52 (21%) pts received FC regimen, including 40 pts treated in first line therapy and 12 pts in second line therapy. FCR therapy was administered in 200 pts (79%): 153 pts received FCR as first line therapy, 38 pts as second line therapy and 8 pts as third or fouth line therapy. The median number of FC cycles was 5 (1–8) with or without R. The estimated OS for the first line therapy was 87,5% in FCR group vs 80% at 3y in FC group (p ns) (Hallek,CLL8: 87% vs 83%) and PFS was 70% in FCR group vs 50% in FC group (p=0,004) with the median of follow-up 45 months. Altogether 184 pts fulfill the criteria for cytopenia analysis. The most frequent immediate subsequent therapy considered as exclusion for this analysis was ASCT consolidation (n 20). Out of 184 pts, 146 recieved FC(R) as 1st line treatment and 38 subsequent therapy. The prolonged cytopenia was observed in 54 pts (29%), 42 (29%) in 1st line group and 12 (32%) in subsequent line group. Median duration of cytopenia was 8 m (2–65), 29 out of 54 patients have had persistent cytopenia at the time of last follow up. The cumulative probability to develop cytopenia was 30.3% at 2y among all pts and 29.7% among first line FCR treated pts. There was no significant difference between FC and FCR treated pts. Eleven pts developed MDS/AML, 7 cases were observed in the followed group of 184 pts (with probability 6.1% at 6y), in all cases the cytopenia preceded the MDS onset, 6y probability to develop MDS was 25.2% for patients who develop prolonged cytopenia after FC(R). Moreover 2 MDS and 1 AML were observed among 20 pts treated with ASCT (6y probability 5.6%, 8y probability 22.5%). The OS probability from 1stcycle of FC(R) was significantly better for pts without cytopenia (75.5% vs 57.5% at 5y, p<0.005), nonsigificant trend was observed if only first line FCR pts were analyzed (88% vs 85%). The median survival for the MDS pts from the time of MDS dg was 6 months only. Conclusions: Although the FCR is the best available standard treatment option for CLL pts, it is associated with prolonged cytopenia in 30% of cases. These patients with prolonged cytopenia afte FC(R) have considerably high probability (25.2%) to develop MDS and they have worse OS compared to pts without cytopenia. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Retreatment Patterns and Outcomes Among Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 5935-5935
Author(s):  
Lincy S Lal ◽  
Benjamin J Chastek ◽  
Cori Blauer-Peterson ◽  
Eric M Maiese
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Real World ◽  
Index Date ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Line Of Therapy

Abstract Introduction: Clinical trials have suggested that retreatment with multiple myeloma (MM) therapy provides clinical benefit (Mohty 2012), however, little is known about real-world utilization and outcomes of retreatment. Information from this analysis will help to better understand the real-world impact of retreatment for management of first MM relapse. Methods: A retrospective claims analysis of commercial and Medicare Advantage patients aged 18 years in the Optum Research Database. To be included, patients had to have ≥ 2 medical claims ≥ 30 days apart with an MM diagnoses (ICD-9 =203.00) between 01 Jan 2009 and 31 Dec 2013 (study period); ≥ 2 lines of therapy and no evidence of hematopoietic cell transplant during the study period and data available for 1 year prior to index date and ≥ 6 months post index date. The date of the first claim of an NCCN recommended MM treatment during the study period was considered the index date. All MM treatments identified < 30 days of the index date were considered part of first line of therapy. An algorithm was developed for identifying subsequent lines of therapy. A new line of therapy was identified when there was a switch to a new agent < 180 days of discontinuation of the prior line of therapy or retreatment with the same treatment ≥ 180 days of discontinuation with previously used agents. Additionally, patients had to be treated for relapse MM defined according to lines of therapy when 1) there was an active line of therapy ≥ 60 days long and there was a gap of ≥ 180 days from the end of the line of active therapy to the start of the next line of active therapy or 2) there was a line of therapy ≥ 180 days long and a different treatment was started, with or without a 180-day gap between discontinuation of the prior line and start of the subsequent line of therapy . The data evaluated in the analysis included baseline demographics, Quan-Charlson comorbidity scores, line of therapy, and clinical outcomes, including treatment duration and overall survival. Data were analyzed using chi-square and t-tests to compare patients with retreatment vs. treatment with a different regimen for first relapse MM (i.e. second-line therapy). Results: A total of 252 patients (mean age: 70 yrs; 48% male) were identified as having second-line treatment for relapse MM; 90 patients (35.7%) were retreated with the same regimen and 162 (64.3%) patients were treated with a different regimen. Mean Quan-Charlson comorbidity scores were equal between the two groups (p=0.585). Among the retreatment group, 48.2% were treated with monotherapy for first-line, compared to 25.2% of the different regimen group (p-value < 0.001). Dexamethasone (dex) monotherapy, bortezomib plus dex, and lenalidomide plus dex were common regimens used in retreatment, see Figure 1. Lenalidomide plus dex was also commonly used as a different regimen for second-line treatment. Additionally, dex monotherapy was significantly less likely to be used as a new therapy compared to being used as retreatment for second-line therapy (p<0.05). Conversely, bortezomib plus lenalidomide plus dex was significantly more likely to be used as a new therapy compared to being used as retreatment for second-line treatment (p<0.05). The mean length of relapse line was 161 days in the retreatment group versus 212 days in the different regimen group (p-value 0.067). The incidence rate of death was 13 events (1.43 events per 10,000 person-days of follow-up) in the retreatment group versus 22 events (1.51 events per 10,000) in the different regimen group (p=0.895). Figure 1: Second-line Treatment Regimens among Patients who Received the Same Regimen (Retreatment) vs. a Different Regimen for the Treatment of First-Relapse MM\s Conclusions: In this analysis, approximately one-third of patients were retreated with the same treatments in first-line and second-line of therapy. Patients who were retreated with the same regimen tended to have shorter duration of second-line therapy. However, risk of death did not appear to differ between the two groups. This real-world analysis suggests that retreatment in second-line may affect the time to next treatment, but may not negatively impact the overall risk of death. Reference: Mohty B, El-Cheikh J, Yakoub-Agha I, et al. Treatment strategies in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: a focus on drug sequencing and 'retreatment' approaches in the era of novel agents. Leukemia 2012; 26: 73-85. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Lal: Optum: Employment. Chastek:Optum: Employment. Blauer-Peterson:Optum: Employment. Maiese:Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Employment.

scholarly journals Multiple Myeloma: Where Do We Lose Ground Along the Treatment Pathway?

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 22-22
Author(s):  
Dharmini Manogna ◽  
Bassil Said ◽  
Naman Sharma ◽  
Fateeha Furqan ◽  
Jonathan Bress ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Binary Logistic Regression ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Negative Predictor

Introduction: Despite progress made in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), a significant percentage of patients are unable to receive second line of therapy. Our study evaluated the burden of infectious complications, and other factors that may play a role in hindering patients from receiving subsequent lines of therapy at a comprehensive teaching hospital. Methods: Patients with MM treated between 2014 and 2019 at Rochester General Hospital were selected from the MM registry. Tool was designed on REDCap for retrospective data collection from electronic medical records. Patients who declined therapy, never received treatment, had smoldering myeloma, or with a concomitant immunocompromising state were excluded. Out of 159 patients, 119 were eligible for analysis. We studied the relationship between patient demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment regimens, and outcomes. Binary logistic regression was used to determine which factors were significant in determining advancement in the line of treatment. The chi-squared statistic was used to determine significance with a Type I error rate set at 0.05. Results: The median age at diagnosis of MM was 68.5 years (Interquartile range=59.2-76.9), 55.4% (n=66) were males, 72.3% (n=86) were Caucasian. Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) staging was available for 77 patients, 27.3% (n=21) were stage I, 58.4% (n=45) were stage II, and 14.3% (n=11) were stage III. Cytogenetics were available for 93 patients, 76.3% (n=71) were standard risk and 23.7% (n=22) were high risk [17p del, t(4;14) or t(4;16)]. A three-drug induction regimen was administered to 61.3% (n=73) patients. Autologous stem cell transplant was performed in 39.5 % (n=47). Sixty-seven patients (56.3 %) received second line therapy. Twenty-six patients did not have a relapse after the first line at the time of data censorship. Patients who did not receive a second line treatment after relapse or progression were 21.8% (n=26). The factors prohibiting proceeding to a second line regimen (can be multiple) included patient preference/poor performance status (n=15), death while on first line treatment (n=15), advanced age (n=6) and prohibitive co-morbidity (n=4). Binary logistic regression showed age to be a significant negative predictor for receiving second line therapy. The odds ratio (OR) of receiving second line therapy was 0.88 for every year increase in age, 95% CI (0.78-0.95), p=0.007 (Figure 1). One or more documented infections within 6 months of diagnosing MM or until transplant date occurred in 32.8% (n=39). Types of infections are depicted in Figure 2. Documented infection was a borderline significant negative predictor for receiving second line therapy with OR =0.23, 95% CI (0.05-1.003), p=0.059. Race, pre-existing chronic kidney disease (CKD), gender and high-risk cytogenetics were not significant predictors of receiving second line therapy (Figure 1). Conclusion: Our study identified advancing age as a significant negative predictive factor to receipt of second line therapy in MM. Documented infections, while borderline significant, had a high impact as to whether a patient receives second line therapy. Strategies such as a formalized geriatric assessment, tailored treatment for frail patients, and infection prevention measures might increase odds of receiving second line therapy and may result in improved outcomes. Disclosures Jamshed: Takeda, Amgen and Celgene: Honoraria.

Efficacy and Toxicity of Addition of Bevacizumab to Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (10) ◽  
pp. 718-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen-Cong Ruan ◽  
Yue-Ping Che ◽  
Li Ding ◽  
Hai-Feng Li
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Adverse Event ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Clinical Prognosis ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: Pre-treated patients with first-line treatment can be offered a second treatment with the aim of improving their poor clinical prognosis. The therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who did not respond to first-line therapy has limited treatment options. Recently, many studies have paid much attention to the efficacy of bevacizumab as an adjuvant treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared with bevacizumab-naive based chemotherapy as second-line treatment in people with metastatic CRC. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for eligible studies updated to March 2018. Randomized-controlled trials comparing addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy without bevacizumab in MCRC patients were included, of which, the main interesting results were the efficacy and safety profiles of the addition of bevacizumab in patients with MCRC as second-line therapy. Result: Five trials were eligible in the meta-analysis. Patients who received the combined bevacizumab and chemotherapy treatment in MCRC as second-line therapy showed a longer overall survival (OS) (OR=0.80,95%CI=0.72-0.89, P<0.0001) and progression-free survival (PFS) (OR=0.69,95%CI=0.61-0.77, P<0.00001). In addition, there was no significant difference in objective response rate (ORR) (RR=1.36,95%CI=0.82-2.24, P=0.23) or severe adverse event (SAE) (RR=1.02,95%CI=0.88-1.19, P=0.78) between bevacizumab-based chemotherapy and bevacizumabnaive based chemotherapy. Conclusion: Our results suggest that the addition of bevacizumab to the chemotherapy therapy could be an efficient and safe treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer as second-line therapy and without increasing the risk of an adverse event.

The combination of thalidomide and intermediate-dose dexamethasone is an effective but toxic treatment for patients with primary amyloidosis (AL)

Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 105 (7) ◽  
pp. 2949-2951 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Palladini ◽  
Vittorio Perfetti ◽  
Stefano Perlini ◽  
Laura Obici ◽  
Francesca Lavatelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Plasma Cells ◽  
Primary Amyloidosis ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Symptomatic Bradycardia ◽  
Intermediate Dose

AbstractBased on the efficacy of thalidomide in multiple myeloma and on its synergy with dexamethasone on myeloma plasma cells, we evaluated the combination of thalidomide (100 mg/d, with 100-mg increments every 2 weeks, up to 400 mg) and dexamethasone (20 mg on days 1-4) every 21 days in 31 patients with primary amyloidosis (AL) whose disease was refractory to or had relapsed after first-line therapy. Eleven (35%) patients tolerated the 400 mg/d thalidomide dose. Overall, 15 (48%) patients achieved hematologic response, with 6 (19%) complete remissions and 8 (26%) organ responses. Median time to response was 3.6 months (range, 2.5-8.0 months). Treatment-related toxicity was frequent (65%), and symptomatic bradycardia was a common (26%) adverse reaction. The combination of thalidomide and dexamethasone is rapidly effective and may represent a valuable second-line treatment for AL.

Intravenous vinorelbine as first-line and second-line therapy in advanced breast cancer.

1995 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 2722-2730 ◽  
Author(s):  
B L Weber ◽  
C Vogel ◽  
S Jones ◽  
H Harvey ◽  
L Hutchins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

PURPOSE We evaluated single-agent intravenous (IV) vinorelbine as first- and second-line treatment for advanced breast cancer (ABC) in patients who were not resistant to anthracyclines. Objective tumor response (TR) and toxicity were assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS A total of 107 women were enrolled onto this multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label phase II study. Patients were stratified into first- and second-line treatment groups, based on prior treatment history. Vinorelbine was initially given at 30 mg/m2/wk, with dose modification for toxicity as indicated. Therapy was continued until disease progression or severe toxicity mandated withdrawal or until the patient asked to be removed from the study. RESULTS The objective response rate for all patients was 34% (95% confidence interval [CI], 25% to 44%): 35% (95% CI, 23% to 48%) for first-line patients and 32% (95% CI, 20% to 47%) for second-line patients. Nine first-line and three second-line patients obtained a complete response (CR). The median duration of objective response was 34 weeks in both groups. The overall survival durations of first- and second-line patients were 67 weeks and 62 weeks, respectively. Granulocytopenia was the predominant dose-limiting toxicity. Two patients died on study as a result of granulocytopenic sepsis. CONCLUSION Single-agent vinorelbine is an effective and well-tolerated agent for first- and second-line therapy of ABC. The results of this study confirm the findings of similar international trials and suggest vinorelbine should be considered a valid treatment option for patients with ABC and a potential component in future combination regimens for this disease.

High-Dose Bi-Weekly THP-COP Induction Treatment Followed by High-Dose Therapy with Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation for Advanced-Stage Follicular Lymphoma as First-Line Therapy.

Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 5207-5207
Author(s):  
Sadao Aoki ◽  
Jun Takizawa ◽  
Masutaka Higashimura ◽  
Akihito Momoi ◽  
Nobuhiro Tsukada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Stem Cell Transplantation ◽  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Cell Transplantation ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Introduction: Most patients with advanced-stage follicular lymphoma(FL) cannot be cured by conventional chemotherapy and have median survival of 7 to 10 years. High-dose chemotherapy (HDT) supported by autologous stem cell transplantation(ASCT) gives a survival benefit for patients with aggressive lymphoma. Recent several multicenter studies have shown that clinical and molecular remissions can be attained in patients with FL receiving intensified high-dose sequential chemotherapy and autografting. We have reported the efficacy and safety of high-dose bi-weekly THP-COP with G-CSF support (HDBW-TCOPG) for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Therefore, we performed a pilot clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of HDBW-TCOPG followed by HDT with ASCT as first-line therapy in patients with advanced-stage FL. Patients and methods: Between August 1998 and December 2003, 10 Japanese patients with previously untreated FL from whom informed consent was obtained were included in this single-center pilot study. Median age was 48 years. All patients had stage 3 or 4 disease, aaIPI LI 8 and HI 2. Histological subtypes of FL included grade 1 4; grade 2 4; grade 3a 2. HDBW-TCOPG consisted of pirarubicin 70 mg/m2 on day 1; cyclophosphamide 1000 mg/m2 on day 1; vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 on day 1; predonisolone 50 mg/m2 from day 1 to 5; lenograstim 2.0 mg/kg/day from day 3. Five patients who enrolled after rituximab was approved for indolent B-cell lymphoma in Japan received induction therapy combined HDBW-TCOPG with rituximab 375mg/m2 on day -2 (R-HDBW-TCOPG). Six cycles were administered at intervals of two weeks. PBSC were collected during the later cycles of HDBW-TCOPG or on the recovery of high-dose etoposide regimen (500mg/m2 for 3 days) administered after the completion of HDBW-TCOPG. Leukaphereses were performed until a minimum of 2.0x106/kg CD34+ cells had been collected. The conditioning regimen consisted of ranimustine 200mg/m2 on day-7 and -2; paraplatin 300mg/m2 on day -6, -5, -4, -3; etoposide 500mg/m2 on day −5, −4, −3; cytarabine 2.5 g/m2 every 12 hours on day −2, −1 (MCE-CA regimen) in 2 patients or cyclophosphamide 50mg/kg on day −2, −1 (MCEC regimen) in 8 patients. Results: Sufficient numbers of PBSC were collected in 5 of 7 patients mobilized with HDBW-TCOPG and in all 5 patients with high-dose etoposide. The median time to reach total number of leukocytes of 1.0 x109/l was nine days (range 8–11). All 10 patients who were in PR at the end of HDBW-TCOP(G) achieved CR post APBSCT. After a median follow up of 36.6 months (range 7–66 months) PFS and OS are 90% and 90%, respectively, for all patients. One patient developed secondary myeloid leukemia with t(3;21) and died at 35 months after APBSCT without signs of recurrence of lymphoma. Another patient who relapsed at 35 months after transplantation. IgH or BCL2 rearrangement was detected by PCR analysis prior to therapy in three patients and one of them still showed detectable disease after HDBW-TCOPG induction. However, all three patients demonstrated MRD negativity after HDT with ASCT. Conclusion: HDBW-TCOPG as induction therapy followed by HDT with ASCT is feasible for advanced-stage FL with acceptable toxicity, and this short term highly intensified therapy may induce cure of the disease by minimizing MRD, but longer follow up is needed to evaluate the impact on survival.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document