Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem-Cell (PBSC) Collection Is Not Impaired by Bortezomib-Thalidomide-Dexamethasone (VTD) Induction Therapy in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (MM)

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 317-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annamaria Brioli ◽  
Giulia Perrone ◽  
Silvestro Volpe ◽  
Silvana Pasini ◽  
Anna Mele ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 317 Introduction: The novel agents bortezomib, thalidomide and lenalidomide have been successfully incorporated into autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) as up-front therapy for newly diagnosed MM. However, several reports have raised concerns about the impact of novel agent-based induction regimens on PBSC collection. Furthermore, the ability to successfully collect PBSCs following initial therapy with two of these newer drugs needs to be confirmed in large phase III clinical trials. Methods: The GIMEMA Italian Myeloma Network designed a phase III study to compare VTD with thalidomide-dexamethasone (TD) as induction therapy prior to double ASCT. Primary study endpoint was the rate of complete or near complete response to each of these two induction regimens, while their toxicity profile – including the impact on PBSC mobilization and collection - was a secondary study endpoint. To address this latter issue, we performed a post-hoc analysis to compare the effect of the triplet VTD induction regimen versus the doublet TD combination on CD34+ cell collection. After three 21-day cycles of VTD or TD induction therapy, patients received intermediate dose cyclophosphamide (CTX 4 g/m2) followed by G-CSF (10 mcg/Kg/die) to mobilize and collect PBSCs. The target threshold to safely perform double ASCT was 4 × 106 CD34+ cells/Kg. Results: Patients evaluable for PBSC collection were 435 out of the 474 who received induction therapy. Of these, 223 were initially randomized to VTD and 212 to TD induction therapy. The median number of collected CD34+ cells was 9.7 × 106/Kg in the VTD arm and 10.7 × 106/Kg in the TD arm (p= n.s.). The planned yield of 4 × 106 CD34+ cells/Kg was achieved with a single harvest in more than 90% of patients in both treatment groups (96% in VTD and 92% in TD, p= n.s.). A yield of CD34+ cells >10 × 106 /Kg was reported in 51% and 56% of patients treated with VTD and TD, respectively (p= n.s.). Only 5 patients (2%) in VTD group and 2 patients (1%) in the TD arm failed to collect more than 2 × 106 CD34+ cells/Kg (p= n.s.). The majority of patients (86% in VTD and 82% in TD, p=n.s.) received CTX as an in-patient procedure, the median time of hospitalization being 4 days. Less than 5% of patients developed grade 3–4 infectious complications (2% in the VTD group vs 3% in TD, p=n.s.) which required hospitalization in only 2 patients. Following ASCT, no significant difference was observed between the two treatment arms in terms of hematologic recovery and non hematological toxicity. Kaplan-Meier curves of TTP and PFS were almost superimposable for patients with a CD34+ yield >10 × 106/Kg and in the range between 4 and 10 × 106/Kg (group 1). These curves were very similar also for patients who collected between 2 and 4 × 106/Kg CD34+ cells or <2 × 106/Kg (group 2). These two groups had significantly different clinical outcomes. Indeed, the 40-month estimates of TTP and PFS were 75% for group 1 vs 40% for group 2 and 60% vs 25%, respectively. OS at 40 months for patients with >10 × 106/Kg CD34+ cells was in the 90% range, a value significantly better than what was seen in the remaining subgroups. In a multivariate Cox regression analysis, yields of CD34+ cells >10 × 106/Kg and in the range of 4 to 10 × 106/Kg were independently associated with prolonged PFS (p=0.001 and =0.027, respectively), while CD34+ cells >10 × 106/Kg predicted for extended OS (p=0.002). Absence of t(4;14) and/or del(17q), and ISS stage 1 or 2 were additional favorable prognostic factors for both PFS and OS, while randomization to VTD independently predicted for longer PFS. Conclusions: Results of the present analysis showed that both TD and VTD shared the advantage of no adverse impact on PBSC collection and the engraftment potential of collected PBSCs. The target for CD34+ cell collection (>4 × 106/Kg) was achieved with a single harvest in more than 90% of patients in both treated groups and a collection failure was reported in 1% to 2% of patients. These favorable results are due to early PBSC collection, which was performed after 3 cycles of TD and VTD, and use of CTX plus G-CSF which allows better stem cell collection and less likelihood of a collection failure. Of particular note, both VTD and TD were associated with a 50% to 59% probability to collect >10 × 106 CD34+ cells/Kg, a variable independently associated with extended PFS and OS. Disclosures: Off Label Use: bortezomib and thalidomide used as induction therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Baccarani:Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cavo:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria; Genzyme: Honoraria.

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 763-763 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Francesca Gay ◽  
Andrew Spencer ◽  
Francesco Di Raimondo ◽  
Adam Zdenek ◽  
...  

Abstract Background High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) improves survival in multiple myeloma (MM). The introduction of novel agents challenged the role of ASCT at diagnosis. We conducted a multicenter 2X2 randomized trial comparing conventional chemotherapy plus lenalidomide with ASCT followed by maintenance with lenalidomide-prednisone (RP) or lenalidomide (R) alone in newly diagnosed young MM (NDMM) patients. Methods Eligible patients with NDMM ≤ 65 years were enrolled. All patients received Rd induction (four 28-day cycles of lenalidomide 25 mg day 1–21 and low-dose dexamethasone 40 mg day 1,8,15,22) followed by stem cell mobilization. Patients were randomized to receive consolidation with CRD [six 28-day cycles of cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2 day 1,8,15), dexamethasone (40 mg days 1,8,15,22) and lenalidomide (25 mg days 1–21)] or MEL200-ASCT (melphalan 200 mg/m2 with stem-cell support). Patients were randomly assigned to receive subsequent maintenance with RP (28-day cycles of lenalidomide 25 mg days 1–21 plus prednisone 50 mg every other day) or R alone (28-day cycles of lenalidomide 25 mg days 1–21). Primary study endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included safety, responses and overall survival (OS). Data cut off was May 30th, 2013. Results Three-hundred and eighty-nine patients were enrolled in the trial. Patient characteristics were well balanced between CRD (n=194) and MEL200-ASCT (n=195), and between R (n=195) and RP (n=194) arms. Median follow-up was 31 months. In the intent to treat (ITT) analysis, the median PFS was not reached with MEL200-ASCT and 28 months with CRD (the respective 3-year PFS was 60% vs. 38%, HR=0.62, 95%CI: 0.49-0.85, P=0.003). Median time from enrolment to maintenance was 14 months. In the population of patients eligible for maintenance, 2-year PFS from the start of maintenance was 73% for RP and 56% for R patients (HR= 0.57, 95%CI: 0.34-0.93; P=0.03). In the subgroup of patients who received MEL200-ASCT, 2-year PFS from the start of maintenance was 83% for patients who received RP and 64% for those who received R alone (HR=0.36 95%CI: 0.15-0.87, P=0.02). In the subgroup of patients who received CRD, 2-year PFS from the start of maintenance was 64% for patients who received RP and 47% for those who received R alone (HR=0.75, 95%CI: 0.40-1.39, P=0.36). At present, no differences in OS were noticed between patients randomised to received CRD or MEL200-ASCT, and between patients who received RP or R maintenance. As expected, the rates of grade 3-4 hematologic (85% vs. 26%, P<0.001) and non-hematologic (35% vs. 19%, P=0.003) adverse events (AEs) were higher in the MEL200-ASCT arm compared with the CRD arm. The main non-hematologic AEs were infections (18% vs. 5%, P=0.001) and gastrointestinal AEs (18% vs. 3%, P<0.001). Rates of grade 3-4 hematologic (8% vs. 7%, P=0.85) and non-hematologic (12% vs. 13%, P=0.88). AEs were similar in the RP and R arms. The main non-hematologic AEs in both RP and R groups were infections (3% vs. 3%). At present, 6 second primary malignancies and 3 cases of cutaneous basalioma have been reported. Conclusions MEL200-ASCT significantly prolonged PFS in comparison with CRD. At present no difference in OS was reported, this may be due to the low number of events and to the length of follow-up. The increase in toxicity with MEL200-ASCT did not adversely impact on efficacy. The addition of prednisone to lenalidomide maintenance significantly reduced the risk of progression in comparison with lenalidomide alone, without increasing the toxicity. Updated data with longer follow-up will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Palumbo: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gay:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Spencer:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Larocca:Celgene: Honoraria. Caravita:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Petrucci:Celgene: Honoraria. Hajek:Celgene: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy. Boccadoro:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 3373-3373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Wuchter ◽  
Uta Bertsch ◽  
Hans-Juergen Salwender ◽  
Markus Munder ◽  
Mathias Haenel ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: The German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group (GMMG) has initiated a randomized multicenter phase III trial on the effect of elotuzumab in VRD (bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone) induction/consolidation and lenalidomide maintenance in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (GMMG-HD6 trial, NCT02495922). The study compares four cycles induction therapy with VRD vs. VRD + elotuzumab, followed by standard intensification (i.e. mobilization and stem cell transplantation), two cycles consolidation with VRD/VRD + elotuzumab and lenalidomide maintenance +/- elotuzumab. The primary endpoint is determination of the best of four treatment strategies regarding progression-free survival. Here we present a first analysis of stem cell mobilization within this study. Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of collection data on all patients who underwent peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) collection between trial initiation in June 2015 and June 2016. Only patients with completely available datasets in respect of mobilization were considered (n=111). The vast majority of 99 patients (89%) received chemomobilization with CAD (cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, dexamethasone) followed by 5-10 µg G-CSF /kg body weight (bw) /d (starting day +9 until completion of PBSC collection), while in one case (1%) dexamethasone was omitted and in 10 cases (9%) cyclophosphamide mono was administered. One patient underwent steady-state mobilization with G-CSF only (10µg /kg bw /d). 55/111 patients received VRD (50%), whereas the remaining patients received VRD + elotuzumab. According to the recommendations of the study group, PBSCs for three stem cell transplants were to be collected. One transplant ideally consisted of ≥2.5 x10^6 CD34+ cells /kg bw, but in the event of poor mobilization as low as ≥2.0 x10^6 CD34+ cells /kg bw would be considered acceptable. Results: The median number of collected CD34+ cells was 10.4 x10^6 /kg bw (range 2.88 to 23.01 x10^6 /kg bw). Overall, 92 patients (83%) collected ≥7.5 x10^6 CD34+ cells /kg bw and another 12 patients (11%) collected between 6.0 and 7.5 x10^6 CD34+ cells /kg bw, resulting in three transplants, respectively. Only 7 patients (6%) collected below 6.0 x10^6 CD34+ cells /kg bw; 5 of them had been treated in the VRD-arm without elotuzumab. Due to insufficient PBSC mobilization after conventional treatment, 14 patients (13%) received a rescue mobilization with plerixafor, from which 12 patients collected ≥6.0 x10^6 CD34+ cells /kg bw. Overall, 7 serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred during mobilization phase, 4 of them in the study arm with elotuzumab. Conclusions: Cyclophosphamide-based chemomobilization after induction therapy with VRD is feasible. Efficient PBSC collection of ≥6.0 x10^6 CD34+ cells /kg bw could be performed in 104 of 111 patients (94%), with a low incidence of SAEs. The need for rescue mobilization was not higher than that of comparable previous GMMG treatment protocols. The addition of elotuzumab during induction phase did not impede PBSC collection. Disclosures Wuchter: Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Hexal: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bertsch:Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Chugai: Research Funding. Munder:Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Fenk:Jansen: Honoraria, Other: travel support; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding. Hillengass:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Raab:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Ho:Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Scheid:Medac: Other: Travel, accomodations or expenses; Baxalta: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accomodations or expenses; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Other: Travel, accomodations or expenses; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria. Weisel:Onyx: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Chugai: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Onyx: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 1974-1974
Author(s):  
Chiara Cerrato ◽  
Francesca Gay ◽  
Maria Teresa Petrucci ◽  
Pellegrino Musto ◽  
Gianluca Gaidano ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Several trials have shown that maintenance therapy prolongs progression-free survival (PFS) in multiple myeloma (MM) patients, eligible and ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT); conflicting data exist about its impact on overall survival (OS). The role of maintenance in patients with a sensitive disease is still unclear. We conducted a retrospective pooled analysis to clarify the impact of continuous treatment in patients achieving a complete response (CR). Methods Data from newly diagnosed MM patientsenrolled in 4 phase III trials were analysed. Two trials included ASCT-eligible patients: RV-MM-209 [melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) vs melphalan 200 mg/m2 (Mel200), followed by lenalidomide maintenance vs no maintenance), RV-MM-EMN-441 (cyclophosphamide-lenalidomide-dexamethasone vs Mel200, followed by lenalidomide vs lenalidomide-prednisone maintenance). Two studies enrolled elderly, ASCT-ineligible patients: GIMEMA-MM0305 (bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide followed by bortezomib-thalidomide vs bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone) and EMN01 (MPR vs cyclophosphamide-prednisone-lenalidomide vs lenalidomide-dexamethasone, followed by lenalidomide vs lenalidomide-prednisone maintenance). The primary endpoint of the study was to evaluate the impact of maintenance on PFS and OS in patients who achieved CR. Univariate analyses of OS and PFS were performed. Response was considered as a time-dependent variable with a landmark point at 12 months. Lastly, a multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of maintenance and ASCT as independent variables. Results A total of 1964 patients were retrospectively analysed. Of 1503 patients who received maintenance therapy, 254 achieved a CR and 931 a very good partial response (VGPR) or partial response (PR). After a median follow-up of 41 months, a significant 5-year OS (80% vs 54%; HR 0.55, p=0.02; Figure 1) and 5-year PFS (52% vs 19%; HR 0.47, p<0.001; Figure 2) advantage was reported among CR patients who received maintenance in comparison with no maintenance. The same analysis was conducted in patients achieving a suboptimal response (VGPR or PR): the 5-year PFS advantage was confirmed in patients who received maintenance vs patients who did not (30% vs 13% HR 0.65, p<0.001); the 5-year OS was 68% vs 38% in patients who received maintenance vs no maintenance respectively (HR 0.8, p=0.2). A subgroup analysis was conducted in CR patients according to the treatment received [ASCT vs conventional chemotherapy (CC)]; the PFS benefit among patients treated with maintenance was confirmed across both the subgroups (ASCT group: HR 0.45, p=0.02; CC group: HR 0.45 P<0.001). In multivariate analysis, maintenance therapy and treatment with ASCT confirmed the favourable impact on PFS and OS in patients achieving CR. Conclusion In CR patients,maintenance therapy significantly prolongs PFS and OS. In order to optimize treatment efficacy and to prolong survival in patients with a sensitive disease, the intensification with maintenance is strongly recommended. Disclosures Off Label Use: Use off-label of drugs for the dose and/or schedule and/or association. Gay:Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gaidano:Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Advisory boards; Celgene: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Other: Advisory boards; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Advisory boards; Morphosys: Honoraria, Other: Advisory boards; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Other: Advisory boards; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory boards; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory boards. Offidani:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Sanofi, Amgen, Mundipharma: Honoraria. Patriarca:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Merck Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria. Di Raimondo:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene: Honoraria. Hájek:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene, Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consultancy, Honoraria. Boccadoro:Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Palumbo:Novartis, Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Celgene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genmab, Janssen-Cilag, Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3475-3475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maximilian Merz ◽  
Hans Salwender ◽  
Mathias Hänel ◽  
Uta Bertsch ◽  
Christina Kunz ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: In patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM), Moreau and colleagues (Lancet Oncol, 2011) demonstrated that subcutaneous (SC) administration of bortezomib (BTZ) significantly reduced rates of adverse events (AE) compared to the intravenous (IV) formulation without loss of efficacy. Prospective data on SC BTZ in newly diagnosed MM are limited. We investigated the impact of SC versus IV BTZ in two different induction therapies for patients with newly diagnosed MM treated within the multicenter, prospective randomized MM5 trial of the German Myeloma Multicenter Group (GMMG). Methods: From 06/2010 until 11/2013, 604 patients were randomly assigned to receive 3 cycles of PAd (BTZ 1.3 mg/m2, days 1, 4, 8 and 11; Doxorubicin 9 mg/m2 IV, days 1-4; Dexamethasone 20 mg/d, orally, days 1-4, 9-12 and 17-20) or 3 cycles VCD (BTZ 1.3 mg/m2, days 1, 4, 8 and 11; Cyclophosphamide 900 mg/m2IV; day 1, Dexamethasone 40 mg/d, orally, days 1-2, 4-5, 8-9 and 11-12) for induction therapy. In the MM5 trial, induction therapy is followed by stem cell mobilization and harvest, high-dose therapy and Lenalidomide-based consolidation/maintenance therapy. Primary end points of the ongoing study are response to treatment after induction therapy and progression-free survival. Due to improved AE profile of SC compared to IV BTZ reported by Moreau, the administration of BTZ was changed from IV to SC in 02/2012. Therefore, we were able to perform an explorative analysis of 598 patients who received at least one dose of trial medication (PAd: n=150 IV / 140 SC; VCD: n=154 IV / 140 SC). 14 patients were excluded from the analysis because administration of BTZ was changed after start of induction therapy. We analyzed whether the route of administration influenced the applied cumulative BTZ dose, toxicity and efficacy of PAd and VCD. Results: The cumulative applied BTZ dose was significantly higher in patients treated with SC BTZ (PAd: 28.9 mg; VCD: 28.8 mg) compared to IV-treated patients (PAd: 27.6 mg; VCD: 27.9 mg; p = 0.007). Analysis of reported AEs associated to induction therapy revealed a significantly higher rate in patients treated with IV BTZ (65.1%) compared to SC-treated patients (55.7%, p = 0.02). AE > °II were reported more frequently in the IV group (IV: 52.0%; SC: 43.9%, p = 0.004). In detail, abnormal laboratory findings including leucopenia and thrombocytopenia (IV: 23.0%; SC: 16.4%, p = 0.05), metabolism and nutrition disorders (IV: 12.5%; SC: 5.4%, p = 0.004) and gastrointestinal disorders (IV: 9.9%; SC: 3.9%, p = 0.006) occurred more often in IV-treated patients. Analysis of peripheral neuropathy (PN) ≥ °II revealed no significant differences between IV and SC BTZ during the first two cycles of induction therapy (cycle 1: IV: 1.6%; SC: 2.5%; cycle 2: IV: 2.3%; SC: 3.6%) but PN occurred more often in IV-treated patients during the third cycle of induction therapy compared to the SC group (IV: 7.6%; SC: 1.8%, p = 0.001). Overall response rates (partial response or better) were not influenced by the route of administration in patients treated with PAd (IV: 72.7%; SC: 70.7%; p = 0.79) or VCD (IV: 77.9%; SC: 82.1%; p = 0.39). Analysis of the VCD arm showed that rates of VGPR or better were significantly higher in patients treated with IV BTZ compared to SC-treated patients (IV: 41.6%; SC: 28.6%, p = 0.02). Rates of VGPR or better were also higher for IV-treated patients in the PAd arm but did not reach statistical significance (IV: 36.7%; SC: 31.4%, p=0.39). Patient characteristics including baseline creatinine levels > 2 mg/dl, obesity or age at inclusion > 65 years did not influence efficacy of IV or SC BTZ in both arms. Conclusion: Last year we reported on the favorable toxicity profile and equal efficacy of VCD compared to PAd. With the current analysis we demonstrate that toxicity is further reduced with SC BTZ compared to IV. We therefore recommend VCD as induction therapy. However, we show for the first time a possible loss of efficacy in SC-treated patients. Therefore it remains unclear whether the reduced toxicity justifies the general application of SC BTZ in newly diagnosed, transplant-eligible patients or whether a prolonged treatment (4 x VCD SC) may reduce toxicity while achieving similar efficacy. Further studies are warranted since our results are partially in contrast with the previously presented data in relapsed MM and the ongoing MM5 trial was initially not designed to prospectively investigate the effect of SC or IV BTZ. Disclosures Salwender: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Binding site: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Scheid:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Mai:Janssen: Travel support Other. Hose:Novartis: Research Funding. Schmidt-Wolf:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Weisel:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy; Noxxon: Consultancy. Duerig:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Polyphor: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Chugai: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 927-927
Author(s):  
Roberto Mina ◽  
Alessandra Larocca ◽  
Massimo Offidani ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Tommaso Caravita ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction The introduction of novel agents in the treatment of Multiple Myeloma (MM) led to a significant improvement in the quality of response, increasing the number of patients able to achieve a complete response (CR). Several studies showed that the achievement of CR improved survival, both in young and elderly patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). In this study we investigated the impact of CR on survival obtained with either autologous stem cell transplantation or conventional chemotherapy in NDMM patients. Patients and Methods Data from NDMM patientsenrolled in 5 phase III Italian trials were analysed. Three trials included patients eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT): RV-MM-209 (melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide [MPR] vs high-dose melphalan [Mel200] and ASCT, followed by lenalidomide maintenance vs no maintenance), RV-MM-EMN-441 (cyclophosphamide-lenalidomide-dexamethasone vs Mel200-ASCT, followed by lenalidomide [R] versus lenalidomide-prednisone [RP] maintenance) and MM-BO2005 (bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone vs thalidomide-dexamethasone as induction/consolidation, followed by dexamethasone maintenance). The two remaining studies included elderly patients ineligible for ASCT: GIMEMA-MM0305 (bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide followed by bortezomib-thalidomide maintenance vs bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone) and EMN01 (MPR vs cyclophosphamide-prednisone-lenalidomide vs lenalidomide-dexamethasone, followed by R vs RP maintenance). The primary objective of the study was the evaluation of the impact of CR on overall-survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) and its relationship with age (young vs elderly patients) and type of treatment (ASCT vs conventional chemotherapy [CC])). Univariate and multivariate analyses of OS and PFS, including ISS, ASCT and type of novel agents used as induction treatment, were performed. Response was treated as a time-dependent variable. A landmark analysis was performed. Results 2439 NDMM patients were evaluated; the best response was available in 2359 patients. 656 patients achieved a CR or better, whereas 1353 patients achieved a very good partial response (VGPR) or a partial response (PR), and were included in the analysis. After a median follow-up of 44 months, the 5-year OS was 75% in CR patients as compared with 60% in VGPR/PR patients (HR 0.49, p<0.001), and 5-year PFS was 44% and 22% (HR 0.44, p<0.001), respectively. Among CR patients, 383 were treated with ASCT and 273 with CC. A trend towards a better 5-year OS was reported in the ASCT group as compared with the CC group (79% vs 69%; HR 0.6, p=0.09; Figure 1). A significant PFS advantage was observed among CR patients treated with ASCT in comparison with those who received CC (median, 59 vs 47 months; HR 0.54, p=0.008; Figure 2). No significant differences were observed between young and elderly CR patients treated with CC in terms of 5-year PFS (43% vs 41%; HR 0.9, p=0.5) and 5-year OS (73% vs 69%; HR 1.07, p=0.8). In the multivariate analysis, ASCT confirmed to be an independent predictor of prolonged PFS in CR patients, with a trend towards longer OS, in comparison with CC. Conclusions ASCT induced deeper CR that translated into prolonged PFS and OS as compared with CC. No differences were noticed between young and elderly patients achieving a CR with CC. Disclosures Off Label Use: Use off-label of drugs for the dose and/or schedule and/or association. Larocca:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene: Honoraria. Offidani:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Sanofi, Amgen, Mundipharma: Honoraria. Bringhen:Merck Sharp & Dohme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy; Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Novartis: Honoraria. Caravita:Celgene: Honoraria. Di Raimondo:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene: Honoraria. Gaidano:Celgene: Research Funding; Morphosys, Roche, Novartis, GlaxoSmith Kline, Amgen, Janssen, Karyopharm: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Boards. Petrucci:Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Ria:Italfarmaco: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Hajek:Celgene, Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Cavo:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Amgen, BMS: Honoraria. Boccadoro:Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Palumbo:Novartis, Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Celgene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genmab, Janssen-Cilag, Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 2155-2155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria-Victoria Mateos ◽  
Albert Oriol ◽  
Laura Rosiñol ◽  
Felipe de Arriba ◽  
Jesús Martín ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Bortezomib-based combinations, including alkylating agents (VMP or CyBorD) or immunomodulatory drugs (VTD or RVD) have been established as regimens widely used in newly diagnosed MM patients. Bendamustine is a bifunctional alkylating agent effective in relapsed and/or refractory MM patients, and approved in Europe in combination with prednisone for elderly newly diagnosed MM. Since bendamustine may be more efficient than other alkylators, an attractive possibility would be to explore it in combination with bortezomib and prednisone (BVP) in newly diagnosed MM patients both transplant and non transplant candidates. Patients and Methods 60 newly diagnosed MM patients were included in the trial. The first cycle consisted on bendamustine at 90 mg/m2 given IV on days 1 and 4, in combination with bortezomib at 1,3 mg/m2 given IV on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29 and 32 and prednisone at 60 mg/m2 given PO on days 1 to 4. In the following cycles, bendamustine was given on days 1 and 8, and bortezomib on days 1, 8, 15 and 22 (weekly schedule), and prednisone as it was previously described. Patients younger than 65 years proceeded to peripheral blood stem cell collection (PBSC) using growth factors alone after 4 cycles; HDT-ASCT was performed after 6 cycles. Patients older than 65 years received up to nine 28-day cycles. Results Between May 2011 and July 2012 enrollment was completed (60 pts). Median age was 61 years (range 38-82; 18 pts ≥65), 67% had ISS stage II/III, and 67% had unfavorable cytogenetics: t(4;14), t(14;16), del 17p or 1q gains by FISH. After a median of 6 cycles (2-9), 75% of patients achieved at least PR, including 16% of sCR, 9% CR and 28% of VGPR. Although the differences were not statistically significant, there was a trend to higher CR rate in the group of patients <65 years (31%) compared with elderly patients (11%). No differences were observed in overall response rates and CR rates in patients with standard and high risk cytogenetic abnormalities. Forty patients proceeded to stem cell collection after a median of 4 cycles of BVP. Upon using G-CSF alone, 14 pts (35%) failed to collect a minimun of 2 x 106 CD34+ cells/Kg. An ammendment was done and plerixafor was recomended for poor mobilizers (peripheral CD34 cell count inferior to 10/μL on day 4); all patients but 2 achieved, with G-CSF plus plerixafor, the minimum of CD34+ cells required to proceed to ASCT. These 2 patients successfully collected CD34+ cells using chemotherapy plus G-CSF and plerixafor. Of the 31 patients who received HDT-ASCT, sCR and CR rate before transplant was 18% and 13%, respectively, upgrading up to 39% of sCR and 13% CR after transplant. 7 pts (22%) achieved immunophenotypic CR. After a median f/u of 12 months (5-25), 8 pts have progressed, resulting in a 15-m TTP of 85%. Concerning OS, 89% of patients remained alive at 15 months. None of patients achieving sCR and CR have progressed and all of them are alive at 15 months. Regarding cytogenetic abnormalities, although there were not significant differences, one patient progressed in standard risk group and five in the high risk subgroup resulting in a 15 m-TTP of 93% vs 85%. No significant differences have been observed in terms of 15 m-OS between standard and high risk cytogenetic subgroup (100% vs 92%, respectively). As far as toxicity is concerned, hematologic toxicities included: G3/4 anemia (11%), neutropenia (23%), and thrombocytopenia (14%). The most common G3/4 non-hematologic toxicities were: asthenia (10%), infections (9%), and peripheral neuropathy (4%). Conclusions In patients candidates to HDT-ASCT, response rates obtained before and after transplant are comparable to other three drug bortezomib-based combinations, such as VTD or CyBorD. However, growth factors alone for stem cell collection after four BVP cycles as induction resulted in a 35% of poor mobilizers who were rescued with plerixafor. In the elderly population, although the number of patients included was small, BVP seems not superior to VMP in response rates. Disclosures: Mateos: Janssen, Mundipharma: Honoraria. Off Label Use: bendamustine plus bortezomib and prednisone is not an approved combination for first line of therapy. Oriol:Celgene: Consultancy. Ocio:Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Array Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Alegre:Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Bladé:Janssen, Mundipharma: Honoraria. San Miguel:Janssen, Mundipharma: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1837-1837
Author(s):  
Eyal Lebel ◽  
Katherine Lajkosz ◽  
Esther Masih-Khan ◽  
Donna E. Reece ◽  
Suzanne Trudel ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is standard therapy for selected patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Studies in MM and lymphoma have suggested that ability to mobilize and collect a higher yield of CD34 + cells predicts for improved survival outcomes, perhaps reflecting better bone marrow reserve (Bolwell 2007, Raschle 2011). We aimed to validate this hypothesis by correlating high CD34 + cell collection ("supermobilizers") and survival outcomes in a large myeloma cohort with long follow-up. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed MM patients (pts) who underwent ASCT at our centre 2000-2010, correlating number of CD34 + cells collected with post-transplant progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Stem cells were mobilized using cyclophosphamide 2.5 g/m 2 IV (day 1), G-CSF 10 ug/kg/day SC (starting on day 4), and leukapheresis (day 11), targeting 4x10 6/kg but accepting a minimum of 2x10 6/kg to support a single transplant. Using a cut-off used in previous studies, pts were categorized as "supermobilizers" if ≥8x10 6/kg CD34+ cells were collected. Results: 621 pts were analyzed. Most pts (422/605; 70%) received high dose dexamethasone (HDD) alone or in combination with vincristine and adriamycin (VAD) for pre-transplant induction therapy (pre-dating the novel agent era) with only 18% (110/605) receiving more contemporary bortezomib-based induction (mostly cyclophosphamide, bortezomib and dexamethasone; CyBORD). The median number of CD34 + cells collected for all pts was 13.9x10 6/kg (range 2.1-61.8). The median CD34 + cells re-infused was 6.2x10 6/kg (range 2.1-25), as some cells were reserved for 2 nd ASCT, but median CD34+ cells collected correlated with CD34 + cells infused (Pearson coefficient 0.81, p&lt;0.001). At a median follow-up of 74 months (m), we were surprised to report an inferior PFS of 24.1m for the supermobilizers collecting ≥8x10 6/kg vs 33.7m for the &lt;8 group (p=0.038, Figure 1a), without differences in OS (p=0.612, Figure 1b). No further discrimination in PFS was observed when using a more extreme supermobilizer cut-off of 15x10 6/kg. To further understand the counterintuitive result of shorter PFS with higher mobilization capacity, we explored the continuous relationship between CD34 + cells and PFS, identifying another optimal cut-off of 4.5x10 6/kg. Pts collecting in the mid-range (4.5-8; n=129) achieved the best PFS of 34.5m, significantly improved over 24.1m in the ≥8 group (n=478) and 11.4m in the small group at the extreme lower collection range (n=14; ≤4.5x10 6/kg)(Figure 1c). A similar pattern was seen with OS (Figure 1d). Clinical and laboratory parameters that may impact both collection capacity and survival, such as age, ISS, and kidney dysfunction, were investigated as confounders but were similar between collection groups and did not predict for PFS in multivariable analyses. Treatment variables, however, differed between groups: the lower collection groups more often received bortezomib-based induction (29%, 31% and 14% in the ≤4.5, 4.5-8 and ≥8 groups, respectively, p&lt;0.001) resulting in deeper responses pre-transplant (VGPR 50% in the ≥8 group vs 43% in the 4.5-8 group, p=0.024) (Table 1). Use of maintenance therapy post-ASCT also differed (50%, 40% and 28% in the ≤4.5, 4.5-8 and ≥8 groups, respectively, p=0.006). Discussion: In this large cohort of 621 MM patients, we report that "supermobilizers" who collected ≥8 x 10 6 CD34 + cells/kg exhibit inferior PFS from transplant than those with less robust mobilization. We suspected that this unexpected observation was due to confounding variables, and identified differences in treatment, primarily greater use of bortezomib-based induction and post-transplant maintenance therapy in the lower collection group. This group was able to achieve deeper responses (≥VGPR) even before transplant than the supermobilizer group, leading to improved PFS. Although bortezomib is routinely used as induction therapy pre-transplant currently and is not felt to be stem cell toxic, it may impair mobilization to a lesser degree, leading not to abject failure of collection but lowered capacity to achieve "supermobilizer" status. Although more research is needed to validate this hypothesis, we can at minimum conclude that high stem cell collection does not appear to predict for a long-term survival advantage. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Reece: Millennium: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding. Trudel: Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy. Prica: Astra-Zeneca: Honoraria; Kite Gilead: Honoraria. Chen: Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 10-10
Author(s):  
Rajni Agarwal ◽  
Kenneth I. Weinberg ◽  
Hye-Sook Kwon ◽  
Anne Le ◽  
Janel R Long-Boyle ◽  
...  

Successful hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) requires vacating recipient hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) niches in the bone marrow to permit donor HSC engraftment that can provide life-long hematopoietic and immune function. Currently, HSCT in SCID relies on DNA damaging chemotherapy to eliminate recipient HSC and achieve niche clearance. We have pursued a non-toxic approach to target and deplete HSC using a humanized monoclonal antibody, JSP191, that binds human CD117 (c-Kit). We previously showed the safety and successful HSC engraftment in a Phase 1 trial of the first 6 patients with severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), who underwent a second transplant because of HSC engraftment failure and poor immunity after their first transplantation. In these re-transplant patients even a low level of stringently measured myeloid chimerism resulted in significant and sustained generation of naive T cells and clinical improvement. Based on these results, the study of JSP191 (NCT#02963064)has opened a cohort of newly diagnosed infants with SCID. Here we report data from the first patient in this cohort, a SCIDX1 patient who received a primary HSCT with haploidentical CD34+ cells after conditioning with JSP 191. The patient had a c.270-15A&gt;G variant in the IL2RG gene, which is predicted to cause a null phenotype. Besides a T- B+ NK- phenotype typical of SCIDX1 including dysfunctional B cells, the patient had anemia and intermittent neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Despite evidence of maternal T cell engraftment, the patient had no clinical graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). The patient was initially enrolled in a trial of lentiviral gene therapy, but harvested bone marrow cells died in vitro during transduction and culture. The patient also mobilized poorly with G-CSF/Plerixafor. Further investigation revealed heterozygosity for loss-of-function mutations in two genes involved in DNA repair, BRCA1 and RAD51; Diepoxybutane (DEB) breakage study showed greater than normal pathologic chromosomal breaks, but less than that seen in Fanconi anemia. Because of concern for possible hypersensitivity to alkylating agent-based conditioning, the patient was referred for transplant with JSP191 conditioning. The patient received a CD34+ peripheral blood HSCT from his father after conditioning with 0.3 mg/kg of JSP 191 antibody intravenously over an hour on Day -8 and rATG (Thymoglobulin) on Day -5, -4, -3 and -2 (3.5 mg/kg total) to prevent rejection by the maternal T cells. The cryopreserved donor CD34+ cells were administered after sufficient clearance of the JSP191 serum level. The antibody infusion was well tolerated without toxicity, and the post-transplant course was uneventful without acute toxicities or GVHD. As a surrogate marker for HSC engraftment, CD15+ myeloid cells from peripheral blood were stringently sorted by flow cytometry and donor levels were quantified by short-tandem repeat (STR) analysis. Progressive levels of myeloid engraftment were observed beginning at Week 4. The level of donor chimerism at 12 weeks was 8% in the sorted CD15+ blood cells, and a marrow aspirate showed 25% donor CD34+ cells. By 3 months pre-existing abnormal CD19-CD20+ host B lymphocytes were significantly reduced, and CD19+ donor-derived B lymphocytes were emerging. At 2 months, CD4+ recent thymic emigrant and naïve T lymphocytes were observed, and by 3 months, overall T and NK lymphocyte numbers were 390/uL and 117/uL, respectively. Normal blastogenic responses to the T cell mitogen PHA were observed at 3 months. These first-in-class results provide proof of concept of the safety and efficacy of the use of JSP191 antibody to clear host marrow niche space to enable sufficient donor HSC engraftment and immune reconstitution as primary therapy of SCID. Non-genotoxic conditioning with JSP191 may replace conventional conditioning for newly diagnosed infants with SCID, thereby avoiding toxicities of chemotherapy. Disclosures Kohn: Allogene Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orchard Therapeutics: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding. De Oliveira:Orchard Therapeutics: Research Funding; bluebird bio, Inc.: Research Funding. Czechowicz:Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Brown:Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ansun: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cidara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Allogene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cellerant Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shizuru:Jasper Therapeutics, Inc: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3242-3242
Author(s):  
Robert Henderson ◽  
Mary R Cahill ◽  
Philip Murphy ◽  
Vitaliy Mykytiv ◽  
John Quinn ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction : Daratumumab (DARA), a human IgG1k monoclonal antibody with single activity in multiple myeloma (MM) shows strong synergy in combination with other anti-MM agents, including immunomodulatory drug (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (PI). This has led to the exploration of DARA in combination with front line regimens. Triplets including a PI and an IMiD are considered an ideal backbone with which to combine DARA prior to Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT). However, based on the ability of Cyclophosphamide (Cy) to enhance DARA mediated antibody dependent cellular phagocytosis, we hypothesized that CyBorD may provide an alternative option (Naicker, ASH 2017). We are currently exploring the preliminary safety and efficacy of CyBorD and DARA as part of an ongoing phase 1b study in newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) pts eligible for ASCT. Last year we reported on the safety of this combination with an absence of dose limiting toxicity (DLT) with weekly subcutaneous (SQ) Bortezomib (Bor) 1.5mg/m2, Cy 300mg/m2 and DARA 16mg/kg (McEllistrim, ASH 2017). We now report on the efficacy of this regimen as pre-transplant induction, including the rate of CR post ASCT. Methods : Pts received 4 cycles of induction therapy with weekly CyBorD and DARA 16mg/kg weekly for cycles 1 and 2 and every 2 weeks for cycles 3 and 4. Following induction therapy, pts proceeded to stem cell mobilization and ASCT followed by 2 cycles of consolidation therapy with weekly CyBorD plus DARA 16mg/kg on days 1 and 15. Following completion of consolidation therapy, all pts receive DARA maintenance every 28-days for 2 yrs or until progression, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal of consent. Pts with high-risk features receive Bor on days 1 and 15 during maintenance phase. The primary endpoints were the incidence of DLT within the first cycle of combination at each dose level and CR rate post ASCT. Secondary endpoints included: safety, CR rate at the end of induction, consolidation and maintenance, best overall response, minimal residual disease (MRD) negative rate, progression-free survival, clinical benefit rate and overall survival. Responses were investigator-assessed as per IMWG criteria. This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02955810. Results : Eighteen pts were enrolled between Nov 2016 and Dec 2017 and received at least 1 dose of treatment. Baseline characteristics were: median age = 56 y (range 32-66); M (61%), F (39%), ISS stage I, II, III in 78%, 17% and 6% of pts, respectively. 28% patients were identified with high risk genetic features [17p deletion and/or t(4;14) by FISH and/or SKY92 (SkylineDx)]. Three patients discontinued therapy early (primary refractory, persistent liver toxicity, death, respectively). Overall, treatment was well tolerated. The most common grade (gr) 3/4 hematologic treatment emergent adverse events (TEAE) were lymphopenia (44%), neutropenia (11%) and anemia (11%). The most common gr 3/4 non-hematologic TEAE were diarrhea (11%) and infection (61%). One patient died from gr 5 diffuse alveolar damage 7 weeks post ASCT. A single patient developed gr 3 liver toxicity. DARA-associated infusion reactions were ≤ gr 2 (11%). On an intent to treat (ITT) basis 94% achieved ≥ very good partial response (VGPR) with ≥ complete response (CR) in 44% pts (Figure). Among the sixteen patients completing 4 cycles of induction ORR was 100%, ≥ VGPR (69%), ≥ CR (13%). Informative NGS data (Adaptive Biotech) are available on 11/16 patients post induction, of whom 100% are MRD negative post induction at a level of ≥ 10e4. Following the induction phase 15/16 patients readily mobilized sufficient CD34 positive progenitors and proceeded to ASCT, one patient failed repeated mobilization. One patient died prior to post ASCT response assessment and data on the last patient is pending. Thus 13/15 patients are currently evaluable for response post ASCT. Responses deepened post ASCT with 100% achieving ≥ VGPR and 62% achieving ≥ CR. Based on EBMT criteria the CR/nCR rate post ASCT was 92%. Post ASCT PET-CT scans were consistent with complete metabolic response in all 13 patients. Updated results, including MRD status post ASCT will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: CyBorD-DARA is a highly active, well tolerated induction therapy for NDMM patients undergoing ASCT. These data support the further development of this combination as a convenient, cost effective alternative to PI-IMiD-DARA based combinations. Disclosures Quinn: Janssen: Honoraria. O'Dwyer:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Onkimmune: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 130 (Suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 901-901
Author(s):  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Massimo Offidani ◽  
Pellegrino Musto ◽  
Anna Marina Liberati ◽  
Giulia Benevolo ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction : Rd and MPR showed to be effective combinations in elderly newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients (pts). Cyclophosphamide is a less toxic alkylating alternative agent. EMN01 is the first trial to formally compare these three different Lenalidomide-based combinations. Maintenance with Lenalidomide has been recently approved in patients eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Few data are available about the best combination as maintenance in patients not eligible for ASCT. Methods : 662 pts with NDMM were randomized to receive 9 28-day cycles of Rd (lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days; dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1,8,15 and 22 in pts 65-75 years old and 20 mg in those &gt;75 years), MPR (lenalidomide 10 mg/day for 21 days; melphalan orally 0.18 mg/Kg for 4 days in pts 65-75 years old and 0.13 mg/Kg in &gt;75 years pts; prednisone 1.5 mg/Kg for 4 days) or CPR (lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days; cyclophosphamide orally 50 mg/day for 21 days in pts 65-75 years old and 50 mg every other day in &gt;75 years pts; prednisone 25 mg every other day). After induction, pts were randomized to receive maintenance with lenalidomide alone (R; 10 mg/day for 21 days) or with prednisone (RP; R, 10 mg/day for 21 days and P, 25 mg every other day), until disease progression. Results : Pts characteristics were well balanced in all groups; 217 pts in Rd, 217 in MPR and 220 in CPR arms could be evaluated. After a median follow-up of 63.7 months, median PFS was 23.2 months in MPR, 18.9 months in CPR and 18.6 months in Rd (MPR vs CPR p=0.02; MPR vs Rd p=0.08). Median overall survival (OS) was 79.9 months in MPR, 69.4 months in CPR and 68.1 months in Rd (MPR vs CPR p=0.98; MPR vs Rd p=0.64). The most common grade ≥3 adverse event (AEs) was neutropenia: 64% in MPR, 29% in CPR and 25% in Rd pts (p&lt;0.0001). Grade ≥3 non hematologic AEs were similar among arms. At the end of induction, 402 pts were eligible for maintenance, 198 in the RP and 204 in the R groups. PFS from start of maintenance was 22.2 months in the RP group and 17.6 in the R group, with 20% reduced the risk of death/progression for pts receiving RP maintenance (HR 0.81, p=0.07; Figure 1). A subgroup analysis was performed to determine the consistency of RP vs R treatment effect in different subgroups using interaction terms between treatment and cytogenetic abnormalities, ISS, age, sex, induction treatment and response before maintenance (Figure 1). No difference in OS was observed (HR 1.02, p=0.93) but the OS analysis was limited by the low number of events. Median duration of maintenance was 23.0 months in RP pts and 20.5 months in R pts, 14% and 13% of pts discontinued due to AEs, in RP and R groups, respectively. Conclusion : This phase III trial compared 2 different Lenalidomide-containing induction regimens and 2 different Lenalidomide-containing maintenance regimens in an elderly community-based NDMM population. MPR prolonged PFS by approximately 5 months, yet the higher incidence of hematologic toxicity should be carefully considered. The addition of low-dose prednisone to standard lenalidomide maintenance reduced the risk of death/progression by 20%, with a good safety profile. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Bringhen: Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Karyipharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Offidani: celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Musto: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Gaidano: Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. De Sabbata: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Palumbo: Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genmab A/S: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Employment, Equity Ownership, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hájek: Amgen, Takeda, BMS, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharma MAR: Consultancy, Honoraria. Boccadoro: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document