A Phase III Study of Enoxaparin vs Aspirin vs Low-Dose Warfarin as Thromboprophylaxis for Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Patients Treated with Thalidomide Based-Regimens.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 492-492 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Michele Cavo ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Maide Cavalli ◽  
Francesca Patriarca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Minor Bleeding ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Dose Warfarin ◽  
Anticoagulant Prophylaxis

Abstract Abstract 492 Background. The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is high in newly diagnosed myeloma (MM) patients who receive thalidomide-based regimens. Anticoagulant prophylaxis is recommended. Controversies exist on the best thromboprophylactic regimen to adopt. Aims. In this prospective, multicenter phase III trial we evaluated the safety and the efficacy of low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or low-dose aspirin (ASA) or low-fixed dose warfarin (WAR) as anticoagulant prophylaxis. End-points were incidence of VTE, acute cardiovascular events, sudden death, major and minor bleeding. Methods. In a GIMEMA study, 991 newly diagnosed MM patients were randomized to VTD (Velcade 1.3 mg/m2 d 1,4,8,11; Thalidomide 200 mg/d; Dexamethasone 320 mg/21 d) or TD (Thalidomide 200 mg/d; Dexamethasone 320 mg/21 d) or VMPT (Velcade 1.3 mg/m2 d 1,8,15,22; Melphalan 9 mg/m2 d 1-4; Prednisone 60 mg/m2 d 1-4; Talidomide 50 mg/d) or VMP (Velcade 1.3 mg/m2 d 1,8,15,22; Melphalan 9 mg/m2 d 1-4; Prednisone 60 mg/m2 d 1-4). In a sub-study, patients treated with VTD or TD or VMPT were randomly assigned to receive LMWH (Enoxaparin 40 mg/d, N=223) or ASA (Aspirin 100 mg/d, N=227) or WAR (Warfarin 1.25 mg/d, N=223) for the duration of the induction therapy; 61 patients were excluded from sub-study because of indication for anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy or high-risk of bleeding. Patients treated with VMP (N=257) did not receive any prophylaxis and were used as controls. Results. Patient characteristics and distribution of major risk factors were similar in all groups. The incidence of VTE was 5% in the LMWH group, 6% in the ASA group and 8% in the WAR group (p not significant). VTEs were 2% in the VMP group. Median time to onset of VTE for patients who received LMWH or ASA or WAR were 4.7, 2.4 and 2.4 months, respectively. Patients who received higher doses of both steroids and thalidomide (VTD and TD) had a higher VTE incidence (7%) in comparison with those who received lower doses (VMPT, 3%, p=0.06). Patients treated with bortezomib (VTD and VMPT) had a lower VTE incidence (5%) in comparison with patients on TD (8%, p=0.08). The rates of cardiovascular events were 2% in the LMWH group, 1% in the ASA group and 0.5% in the WAR group. The incidence of major and minor bleeding was 2% in the LMWH group, 3% in the ASA group and 1% in the WAR group (p not significant). The incidence of combined thrombosis, bleeding and cardiovascular events was 9% in the LMWH group, 10% in the ASA group and 9% in the WAR group (p not significant). Conclusion. The overall incidence of VTE was less than 10% in all groups and was not superior to that expected during the natural course of MM. The LMWH patients had lower risk of VTE, although no statistical difference was observed. LMWH, WAR and ASA are likely to be effective thromboprophylactic regimens. The final analysis on 991 patients will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

A Phase III Study of Enoxaparin Versus Low-Dose Warfarin Versus Aspirin as Thromboprophylaxis for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Treated up-Front with Thalidomide-Containing Regimens

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 3017-3017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Cavo ◽  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Antonietta Falcone ◽  
Pellegrino Musto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Induction Therapy ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Bleeding Complications ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
P Values ◽  
Dose Warfarin ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Thalidomide-containing regimens are currently being used as standard initial therapy for both younger and elderly pts with multiple myeloma (MM), but are associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) which necessitates routine thromboprophylaxis. Controversies exist concerning the best thromboprophylactic regimen to be used in these pts. To address this issue, the Italian Myeloma Network GIMEMA designed a phase III sub-study aimed at prospectively investigating the efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or fixed low-dose warfarin (WAR) or low-dose aspirin (ASA) as prophylaxis against VTE in newly diagnosed MM pts who were randomized to receive primary induction therapy with thalidomide-containing regimens in the context of 2 phase III studies conducted by the same group. In one of these studies, pts with ≤65 years of age were randomly assigned to receive Velcade-Thalidomide-Dexamethasone (VTD) or Thalidomide-Dexamethasone (TD) before autologous transplantation. In the other study, Velcade-Melphalan-Prednisone (VMP) was compared with VMP plus thalidomide (VMPT) for elderly patients aged >65 years. The daily dose of Thalidomide was 200 mg in both VTD and TD, and 50 mg in VMPT. Pts randomized to VTD or TD received a total Dexamethasone dose of 320 mg/cycle, while those assigned to VMP or VMPT were given a total Prednisone dose of 240 mg/m2/cycle. By sub-study design, pts treated on VTD or TD or VMPT were randomly assigned to receive thromboprophylaxis with LMWH (Enoxaparin, 40 mg/d) or WAR (1.25 mg/d) or ASA (100 mg/d) for the duration of induction therapy. At the opposite, pts randomized to VMP did not receive any prophylaxis and were used as controls. Sub-study end points included incidence of VTE, acute cardiovascular events, sudden death, bleeding and any other serious adverse events. At the time of the present analysis, 703 pts who received at least 3 cycles of induction therapy were evaluated. Of these pts, 164 treated on VMP were the control group, while the remaining 539 pts (of whom, 209 treated on VTD, 211 on TD and 119 on VMPT) were randomized to receive either LMWH (n=178) or WAR (n=180) or ASA (n=181). Baseline pts characteristics and risk factors for VTE were comparable in all sub-groups. Overall, the risk of VTE was 3.9% with WAR vs 4.5% with LMWH vs 5.5% with ASA (P values not significant for comparisons between different sub-groups), whereas it was 1.8% among the controls. Median times to onset of VTE for pts treated on LMWH or WAR or ASA were 2.66 vs 2.96 vs 2.10 months, respectively. Pts receiving Velcade-containing regimens (VTD or VMPT) had a VTE frequency in the range of approximately 3%, as compared to 5.8% for pts on TD (P value not significant). The rates of cardiovascular events were 0.6% in each of sub-groups including LMWH, WAR and controls, vs 1.1% for pts treated on ASA. No sudden deaths were reported. The incidence of all grades bleeding was 0.6% with LMWH vs 1.1% with WAR vs 3.3% with ASA (P values not significant for comparisons between different sub-groups), while it was 3.7% among the controls. In conclusion, results of the present analysis show that the overall risk of VTE among sub-groups of pts treated with different thalidomide-containing regimens was not superior to that expected during the natural course of MM. No significant relationship was found between the frequency of VTE and thromboprophylactic regimens, induction treatments (e.g. containing or not Velcade) and age of pts (e.g. young vs elderly). In comparison with LMWH and WAR, there was a higher, albeit marginal, risk of VTE and bleeding complications associated with ASA prophylaxis. Finally, a finding not previously well recognized, fixed low-dose WAR was not inferior to LMWH in reducing the risk of VTE among newly diagnosed MM pts receiving thalidomide-containing regimens. For these pts, LMWH, WAR and ASA are likely to be effective thromboprophylactic regimens.

A Phase III Study of Enoxaparin Vs Aspirin as Thromboprophylaxis for Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Patients Treated with Lenalidomide-Based Regimen.

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 1092-1092 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federica Cavallo ◽  
Francesco Di Raimondo ◽  
Izhar Harda ◽  
Barbara Lupo ◽  
Alessandra Romano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Minor Bleeding ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Abstract 1092 Background: Newly diagnosed myeloma (MM) patients who receive thalidomide-based regimens have a high risk of thromboembolic events. Preliminary studies on MM patients receiving a combination of lenalidomide (R) and dexamethasone have shown an increased incidence of thrombosis as well, with a calculated odds ratio of about 3.5 of developing thrombosis. Aims: In a prospective, multicenter phase III trial (RV-MM-PI-209) newly diagnosed patients were treated with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) induction and subsequently randomized to receive consolidation with lenalidomide + melphalan + prednisone (MPR) or high dose melphalan (MEL200). In this sub-study we evaluated the safety and the efficacy of low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or low-dose aspirin (ASA) as anticoagulant prophylaxis during Rd induction and MPR consolidation. End-points were incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE), acute cardiovascular events, sudden death, major and minor bleeding. Methods: 402 newly diagnosed MM patients were enrolled in the randomized trial RV-MM-PI-209. Treatment schedule included four 28 day cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg days 1–21) and low-dose dexamethasone (40 mg days 1,8,15,22) (Rd) as induction. As consolidation, patients were randomized to receive six 28-day cycles of melphalan (0.18 mg/kg days 1–4), prednisone (2 mg/kg days 1–4) and lenalidomide (10 mg days 1–21) (MPR, N=202) or tandem melphalan 200 mg/m2 with stem-cell support (MEL200, N=200). All eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive LMWH (Enoxaparin 40 mg/d, N=166) or ASA (Aspirin 100 mg/d, N=176) for the duration of the induction therapy and for consolidation therapy in the MPR group; 60 patients were excluded from this sub-study because of indication for anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy or high-risk of bleeding. Results: Patient characteristics and distribution of major risk factors were similar in the two groups. At the time of the present analysis 381 and 130 patients are evaluable during Rd induction and consolidation respectively. During the induction phase, the overall incidence of any grade 3–4 thrombotic events was 1% in the LMWH group, 2,4% in the ASA group (p=.45). VTE, mostly of the lower limbs were equally distributed in the two groups (1%; p not significant), while pulmonary embolism was observed only in the ASA group (2%; p not significant). Median time to onset of thrombotic events for patients who received LMWH or ASA were 2.1 and 1 months, respectively. No acute cardiovascular events were observed and only minor bleeding was detected in the LMWH group (1%). During consolidation no thrombotic events were observed in the MPR group, only one central venous catheter thrombosis was observed in the MEL200 group. Conclusion: The overall incidence of thrombotic events was less than 5% in all groups and confirmed the safety of low dose dexamethasone in association with Lenalidomide. No significant benefit was seen with LMWH over ASA in this patient population. LMWH and ASA are likely to be effective thromboprophylactic regimens in lenalidomide treated patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. The analysis will be updated for the meeting. Disclosures: Cavallo: CELGENE: Honoraria. Guglielmelli:CELGENE: Honoraria; JANSSEN-CILAG: Honoraria. Boccadoro:CELGENE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; JANSSEN-CILAG: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Palumbo:CELGENE: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; JANSSEN-CILAG: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

A Prospective, Randomized, Phase III Study of Enoxaparin Versus Aspirin Versus Low-Fixed-Dose of Warfarin in Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Patients Treated with Thalidomide-Containing Regimens.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 310-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Michele Cavo ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Giulia Perrone ◽  
Valeria Magarotto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
High Dose Dexamethasone ◽  
Anticoagulant Prophylaxis

Abstract Background: The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is high in newly diagnosed myeloma (MM) patients who receive thalidomide-containing regimens. Anticoagulant prophylaxis is recommended but it’s not clear which is more appropriate. In this prospective, multicenter phase III trial we evaluated the safety and the efficacy of low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or low-dose aspirin (ASA) or low-fixed dose warfarin (WAR) as anticoagulant prophylaxis. Methods: In a GIMEMA study, newly diagnosed MM patients were randomized to VTD (Velcade 1.3 mg/m² d 1,4,8,11; Thalidomide 200 mg/d; high-dose Dexamethasone 320 mg/21 d) or TD (Thalidomide 200 mg/d; high-dose Dexamethasone 320 mg/21 d) or VMPT (Velcade 1.3 mg/m² d 1,8,15,22; Melphalan 9 mg/m² d 1–4; Prednisone 60 mg/m² d 1–4; Talidomide 50 mg/d) or VMP (Velcade 1.3 mg/m² d 1,8,15,22; Melphalan 9 mg/m² d 1–4; Prednisone 60 mg/m² d 1–4). In a sub-study, patients treated with VTD or TD or VMPT were randomly assigned to receive LMWH (Enoxaparin 40 mg/d) or ASA (Aspirin 100 mg/d) or WAR (Warfarin 1.25 mg/d) for the duration of the induction therapy. Patients treated with VMP did not receive any prophylaxis and were used as controls. End-points were incidence of VTE, acute cardiovascular events, sudden death, bleeding and any other serious adverse events. A total of 950 patients will be included in this study. An interim analysis was performed after the first 200 patients were enrolled. Results: Eighty-two patients received VTD, 84 TD, 34 VMPT and 35 VMP. Two-hundred patients (117 males, median age 58 years) were analyzed: 65 patients were randomized to LMWH, 66 to ASA and 69 to WAR. Patient characteristics were similar in all groups. All patients completed at least the first 3 cycles of therapy. The incidence of VTE was 2/65 (3%) in the LMWH group, 6/66 (9%) in the ASA group and 2/69 (3%) in the WAR group, but differences did not reach statistical significance. VTEs were 2/35 (6%) in the VMP group who did not received any prophylaxis. The cumulative incidence of VTE was 4/116 (3%) in patients treated with Velcade plus Thalidomide, and 6/84 (7%) in those treated with TD (p=0.33). No acute cardiovascular events or sudden deaths were reported. The incidence of bleeding was 0/65 (0%) in the LMWH group, 2/66 (3%) in the ASA group and 2/69 (3%) in the WAR group. Conclusion: The overall incidence of VTE was less than 10% in all groups. ASA patients had higher frequency of VTE; LMWH patients had lower risk of bleeding; patients who received Velcade had lower frequency of VTE. An update of these data and an analysis of risk factors will be presented at the meeting.

Baseline Thrombophilic Alterations and Risk of Venous Thromboembolism in 266 Multiple Myeloma Patients Primarily Treated with Thalidomide and High-Dose Dexamethasone.

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 3997-3997
Author(s):  
Elena Zamagni ◽  
Lelia Valdre ◽  
Michela Cini ◽  
Cristina Legnani ◽  
Patrizia Tosi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Protein C ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Autologous Transplantation ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Induction Phase ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Dose Warfarin

Abstract Venous thromboembolism (VTE) has emerged as a major adverse event of primary induction therapy with thalidomide (thal) and dexamethasone (dex) for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between thrombophilic alterations and the risk of VTE in 266 patients who received four months of therapy with thal (200 mg/d) and pulsed high-dose dex in preparation for double autologous transplantation. The rate of VTE in the whole group of patients was 11.6%. The risk of VTE was 26.3% (86.2% patient-years) among the first 19 patients who entered the study and did not received any prophylaxis against thrombosis. The corresponding value among the remaining 247 patients who received thromboprophylaxis with fixed low-dose (1.25 mg/d) warfarin during the four months of thal-dex therapy was 10.6% (35.5% patient-years) (P=0.04). Episodes of VTE occurred at a median of 53 days from the start of thal therapy and, with the exception of 3 patients, were observed after at least a partial response to thal-dex was documented. No VTE events were recorded during the first two months after the end of the induction phase. After VTE occurrence, the majority of patients went on with thal treatment plus full anticoagulation, without evidence of progression of thrombosis. One hundred and ninety patients were evaluated for the presence of thrombophilic alterations at baseline and at the end of thal-dex therapy. The prevalence of factor V Leiden (3.2%) or g20210A prothrombin (2.1%) polymorphism in patients with MM was similar to that observed in 183 healthy controls (3.3%, P= 0.81; 3.8%, P= 0.50, respectively). The relative risk of VTE for patients carrying one of these thrombophilic alterations was 20% compared with 9.4% for patients who lacked both of them (P= 0.58). Reduced protein C and S activities or acquired activated protein C resistance (aAPCR) were recorded at baseline in 11% and 7.4% of MM patients, respectively. Abnormal values at baseline normalized almost completely at the end of treatment. Carriers of aAPCR and/or of reduced levels of natural anticoagulants at baseline did not have a significantly higher risk of VTE compared with normal patients (15.2% vs 9.3%; P=0.49). In conclusion, no significant relationship was found between baseline thrombophilic alterations, including aAPCR, and the risk of thal-related VTE. Prophylaxis with fixed low-dose warfarin was associated with an apparent decrease in the rate of VTE in comparison with a subgroup of patients who did not receive any thromboprophylaxis. A prospective phase III study comparing low molecular weight heparin with fixed low-dose warfarin with aspirin is currently ongoing in Italy to evaluate the best prophylaxis against the risk of thal-related VTE for patients with newly diagnosed MM.

scholarly journals Three Drug Regimens for Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Transplant-Ineligible Elderly Patients - a Systematic Review

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 5574-5574
Author(s):  
Abdul Aziz Siddiqui ◽  
Kazi Najamus-saqib Khan ◽  
Arafat Ali Farooqui ◽  
Muhammad Saad Farooqi ◽  
Muhammad Junaid Tariq ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Alkylating Agents ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Great Efficacy ◽  
Drug Regimens

Introduction: Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) tend to have comorbidities and/or advanced age that make this subset of patients difficult to manage with current drug regimens. Methods: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov and Web of Science was performed from inception and completed on 07/17/2019. Studies focusing on efficacy and tolerability of 3-drug regimens in patients with NDMM were included for the review. Results: Out of 3579 studies, a total of 10 (08 phase II and 03 phase III) clinical trials in last ten years (2010-2019) using 3-drug regimens in NDMM elderly pts (893M/807F) ineligible for ASCT (determined by investigators) were selected. A total of 1703/1740 NDMM pts were evaluated. Proteasome inhibitors (PIs) such as carfilzomib (C), bortezomib (V) and ixazomib (I) showed promising results in elderly transplant-ineligible NDMM pts. CLARION trial (phase III, n=955) compared two PIs (C and V) with melphalan (M) and prednisone. There was no statistically significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) between two groups (median: 22.3 vs 22.1 months; HR: 0.91; 95% CI, 0.75-1.10, p = 0.159) as well as overall survival (OS) (HR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.82-1.43). Difference in the least square means of the HR-QoL (Health related- quality of life) was 4.99 (p<.0001) favoring C-group. M may not be an ideal drug to combine with carfilzomib in this setting given more AEs.(Facon et al 2019). V as 3-drug regimen in combination with lenalidomide (L) in 242 pts achieved statistically significant prolonged PFS (median 43 mo) and OS (median 75 mo) with great efficacy and acceptable risk-benefit profile. (Durie et al 2017; phase III). Multinational phase II trial (n=70) by Dimopoulos et al (2019) evaluated I, with different fixed doses of cyclophosphamide (Cy). Median duration was 19 cycles, indicating the long-term tolerability of regimen. With favorable toxicity profile and maintained QoL scores, trial concluded that this therapy is tolerable in elderly transplant-ineligible NDMM pts. Tuchman et al (2017) in phase II trial (n=14) investigated (V-Cy-d) and achieved ORR of 64%, with ≥VGPR of 57%. Low dose V showed great efficacy with M yielding ORR of 86% and VGPR or better of 49% in phase II trial (n=101) that also evaluated Cy as 3-drug combination but results were more productive with M with longer PFS and OS which reduced when impact of frailty was examined on outcomes. Since toxicity was higher with M, trial suggested that 2-drug combination should be preferred in elderly frail patients. (Larocca et al 2015). Efficacy was quite promising when Bringhen et al (2014) trialed C with Cy-d; 87% OS and 76% PFS at 1 y in phase II trial (n=58) with much favorable safety profile. Monoclonal antibodies (mAb) such as elotuzumab (E) and pembrolizumab (Pe) are also tested in elderly. First study conducted on NDMM pts using humanized mAb; E, in phase II trial (n=40) by Takezako et al (2017) attained primary endpoint of the study (ORR) of (88%) and VGPR or better of 45% in Japanese pts with tolerable toxicities in elderly. No subjects on this study experienced severe peripheral neuropathy. KEYNOTE-185; a phase III multinational trial by Usmani et al (2019) evaluated Pe with Ld in 151 pts. FDA halted this study due to unfavorable benefit-risk profile; 19 deaths, 6 due to disease progression (PD), and 13 due to treatment-related AEs. Median PFS and median OS were not reached in either group. Immunomodulators such as L achieved one of the longest PFS reported in a trial of transplant ineligible patients (35 mo) by using LVd regimen in phase II multicenter trial (n=50). (O'Donnell et al 2018) Alkylating agents like bendamustine (ben) and M have been tested in different novel regimens. Decreasing intensity and increasing duration of ben resulted in better outcomes in phase II trial (n=59) by Berdeja et al (2016) and can be given as first line treatment. Ben yielded great results with low dose dexa as compared to high dose achieving 92% ORR. Original regimen was effective but relatively more toxic. Incidence of herpes and neuropathy decreased dramatically with the treatment modifications. Conclusion: Three-drug regimens having PIs, mABs, immunomodulators and alkylating agents have shown desirable results in NDMM transplant (ASCT)-ineligible elderly patients and are likely the emerging standard of care for NDMM. Disclosures Anwer: In-Cyte: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Preliminary Results of the Flugaza Trial: A Phase III Randomized, Open Label Study Comparing Azacytidine Versus Fludarabine and Cytarabine (FLUGA Scheme) in Elderly Patients with Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 4036-4036
Author(s):  
Pau Montesinos ◽  
Susana Vives ◽  
Maria P Martinez-Sanchez ◽  
Juan Bergua ◽  
Lorenzo Algarra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Median Duration ◽  
Outpatient Treatment ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
White Blood Cells ◽  
Early Mortality ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Treatment Schedule ◽  
Newly Diagnosed

Abstract Introduction: Current recommendations for the treatment of AML in newly diagnosed elderly patients (≥ 65 years) include different therapeutic options (intensive or semi-intensive chemotherapy, low-dose chemotherapy, hypomethylating agents, and supportive care). Regardless of the selected treatment, the results are disappointing because of low overall survival (OS) rates and significant toxicity. Objectives: The primary objective of FLUGAZA trial is to compare the 1-year-OS in 350 patients aged ≥ 65 years diagnosed with AML assigned to azacytidine (n=175) or FLUGA (n=175) arms. Here we present the results of a pre-planned interim safety analysis for both outpatient treatment regimens. Methods Inclusion criteria: Patients diagnosed with de novo or secondary AML according to WHO classification (except for APL), previously untreated, age ≥ 65 years, ECOG <4. Randomization arms (1:1): azacytidine (AZA) (75 mg/m2 SC days 1-7) and FLUGA (fludarabine 40 mg/m2 PO days 2-6, cytarabine 75 mg/m2 SC days 2-6, filgrastim 5 µg/Kg SC days 1-3), cycles of 28 days. The treatment schedule consisted of 3 induction cycles (C1, C2, C3), 6 consolidation cycles and a maintenance treatment until relapse or progression. FLUGA was reduced in patients older than 75 years and filgrastim in the FLUGA arm was omitted when white blood cells (WBC) were > 25 x109/L. Concomitant use of hydroxyurea was allowed in the AZA arm if WBC was between 15 and 50 x109/L. In patients with more than 50 x109/L WBC assigned to the AZA arm, the first induction cycle was FLUGA. An interim analysis to assess myelotoxicity, early mortality and response rate was planned in the trial when the last of the first 100 randomized patients completed the first 3 induction cycles. Results: From October 2014 to April 2016, 162 patients were enrolled in 26 Spanish centers from the PETHEMA group. Of them, 22 patients were screen failure and 16 patients did not receive the assigned treatment. The first 100 patients treated were analyzed (58 patients were assigned to AZA arm and 42 to FLUGA arm). Baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1. Median age was 75 [65;90] years in AZA arm vs. 77 [65;88] years in FLUGA arm; 36 (62%) vs. 19 (45%) males. Five patients from AZA arm (n=58) received the first cycle of FLUGA because of WBC > 50 x109/L. Outcomes: overall response rate (CR+CRu+PR) based on the best response accumulated with 3 cycles of treatment was 62% in the AZA arm and 57% in the FLUGA arm. CR+CRu was achieved in 14 patients (24%) from AZA arm and 15 (36%) from FLUGA arm. Early mortality rate (8 weeks) was 14% in AZA and 22% in FLUGA arm. Toxicities: there were no differences in hospitalization and non-hematological ≥ G3 serious adverse events (SAEs) between both arms. Overall, 71 patients (71%), 61 out of 79 (77%) vs. 41 out of 64 (64%) patients, developed neutropenia (< 0.5 x x109/L) after C1, C2 and C3, respectively. Median duration of neutropenia in the AZA arm was 14 days (6;40), 21 days (4;95) and 18 days (1;45) after in C1, C2 and C3, respectively, vs. 15 days (4;33), 15 days (3;36) and 20 days (7;41) after C1, C2 and C3, respectively, in the FLUGA arm (no statistically significant differences). Eighty-one (81%), 55 out of 79 (70%) vs. 40 out of 64 (62%) patients, developed thrombocytopenia (< 50 x109/L) after C1, C2 and C3, respectively. Median duration of thrombocytopenia was 14 days (5;29) after C1, 18 days (4;88) after C2 and 14 days (7;25) after C3 in the AZA arm; vs. 16 (3;63), 20 (6;42) and 13 days (7;56) after C1, C2 and C3, respectively, in the FLUGA arm (NS). Conclusions: Outpatient treatment with AZA or FLUGA was feasible. Both treatment arms showed a similar rate of early mortality and relatively low CR/CRu rates. The study is currently enrolling patients until the planned accrual goal (350 patients) to assess the primary end-point (1-year OS). The study is registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02319135. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document