Impact of Renal Impairment (RI) on Outcomes after Treatment (Tx) with Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone (Rd) in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM) Patients (Pts): First Trial Results

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 2112-2112
Author(s):  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Matthew C Cheung ◽  
Murielle Roussel ◽  
Ting Liu ◽  
Barbara Gamberi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Renal Function ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Normal Renal Function ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Failure Time ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: Approximately 20–40% of pts with NDMM present with RI, which is associated with a negative impact on survival (Rajkumar, 2005). In the pivotal phase 3 FIRST trial (median follow-up 37 months [mos]), continuous Rd improved progression-free survival (PFS) vs. melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (MPT) in elderly NDMM pts by 28% (25.5 vs. 20.7 mos; HR = 0.72; P < 0.01) (Facon, Blood 2013). Although 121 pts receiving continuous Rd are still on Tx, the interim overall survival (OS) analysis showed a 22% reduction in the risk of death in favor of continuous Rd vs. MPT (HR = 0.78; P = 0.02). The present analysis was conducted to determine the impact of RI on PFS, OS, and time to 2nd antimyeloma Tx (AMT) as clinical study outcomes. Methods: Pts were randomized to 3 Tx arms: continuous Rd until progression (n = 535); Rd for 18 cycles (72 weeks) (Rd18; n = 541); or MPT for 12 cycles (72 weeks) (n = 547). Enrolled NDMM pts were categorized according to their renal function: 24% had normal renal function (creatinine clearance [CrCl] ≥ 80 mL/min), 44% presented with mild RI (≥ 50 and < 80 mL/min), 23% had moderate RI (≥ 30 and < 50 mL/min), and 9% had severe RI (< 30 mL/min). Pts requiring dialysis were excluded. Lenalidomide starting dose was 25 mg QD for pts with normal renal function or mild RI, 10 mg QD for moderate RI, and 15 mg QOD for severe RI. Melphalan dose was reduced by 50% in pts with moderate or severe RI. The primary endpoint was PFS (continuous Rd vs. MPT); secondary endpoints were OS, overall response rate, time to response, duration of response, time to Tx failure, time to 2nd AMT, health-related quality of life, safety, and improvement in renal function from baseline. Improvement in RI was defined as shifts from baseline to most extreme post-baseline value of the calculated CrCl as a measure of renal function during the active Tx (N = 1484). Results: A PFS benefit favored continuous Rd vs. MPT irrespective of the degree of renal function (Table 1): there was a benefit in pts with normal renal function (HR = 0.72 (0.51–1.02); P = 0.06), and better in pts with mild RI (HR = 0.79 (0.62–1.00); P = 0.05) and moderate RI (HR = 0.62 (0.45–0.85); P < 0.01). A PFS benefit was also seen with continuous Rd vs. Rd18 (a secondary comparison) in pts with mild RI and moderate RI (P < 0.01 for both). An interim OS benefit with continuous Rd vs. MPT was observed in most renal subgroups. Similar results were observed between Rd18 and MPT in terms of PFS or interim OS in any of the renal subgroups. Continuous Rd, compared with Rd18 or MPT, extended time to 2nd AMT in most renal groups except severe RI (CrCl < 30mL/min) (Table 2). Improvement in RI was observed more frequently in pts treated with continuous Rd than those with Rd18 or MPT: improvement of mild RI, 48%, 43%, and 48%, respectively; of moderate RI, 67% 61%, and 62%; and of severe RI, 64%, 59%, and 56%. Overall, < 5% of pts in any Tx group experienced a worsening in renal function status during Tx (continuous Rd 2.2%; Rd18 2.8%; MPT 2.7%). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) for these Txs were anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, deep-vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism (DVT/PE), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (Table 3). Tx discontinuation due to AEs increased in pts with moderate and severe RI, regardless of the type of Tx (Table 3). Conclusions: PFS, OS (at interim analysis), and time to 2nd AMT outcomes generally improved continuous Rd vs. Rd18 or MPT in transplant-ineligible NDMM pts with normal renal function, and in those with mild or moderate RI. The small number of pts in the severe RI group precluded a meaningful conclusion. Continuous Rd was generally well tolerated and renal function improved in the majority of pts during Tx with continuous Rd vs. Rd18 or MPT. Disclosures Dimopoulos: Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide used in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Roussel:Celgene: Consultancy, Lecture fees Other, Research Funding. van der Jagt:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Jaccard:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tosikyan:Celgene: Consultancy. Karlin: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; Sandoz: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bensinger:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Schots:Celgene: Research Funding. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Marek:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ervin-Haynes:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Facon:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Receiving Triplet Therapy in the Connect MM® Disease Registry

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 4229-4229
Author(s):  
Jatin J. Shah ◽  
Rafat Abonour ◽  
Mohit Narang ◽  
Jayesh Mehta ◽  
Howard R. Terebelo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Triplet Regimen

Abstract Introduction: Triplet therapies are used for treatment (Tx) of both transplant-eligible and -ineligible patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Actual patterns and outcomes of Tx are not fully understood. Connect MM® is the first and largest multicenter, US-based, prospective observational cohort study designed to characterize Tx patterns and outcomes for pts with NDMM. This analysis describes demographic and disease characteristics of pts who received triplet Tx as an induction regimen and for whom transplant was or was not intended. The analysis explores the relationship of these factors with overall survival (OS) and other efficacy endpoints. Patients and Methods: Pts aged ≥ 18 y with NDMM within 60 days of diagnosis were eligible for enrollment regardless of disease severity, medical history, or comorbidities. Data including transplant intent (yes/no) was collected at baseline; follow-up data was collected quarterly thereafter. Based on the initial intent, 2 groups were identified: patients with intent to transplant who received transplant (TT) and pts with no intent to transplant who did not receive a transplant (NT). Triplet Tx was defined as the combination of ≥ 3 concurrent therapeutic agents in the first course of Tx (within 56 days of study entry). KM analysis adjusted for age was conducted for OS. Because decisions on use of transplant and triplet therapy are influenced by multiple factors, a multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the contribution of the triplet therapy (yes/no) to OS and was adjusted for other variables, including age, comorbidities, and ISS staging. Results: Between September 2009 and December 2011, 1493 pts were enrolled. This analysis was on 1436 pts: 650 pts with transplant intent and 786 pts without transplant intent. The data cutoff date was November 30, 2014, and the median follow-up for overall survival (OS) was 33.8 mos. Of pts with transplant intent, 451 (69%) received transplant (TT) and 199 (31%) did not. Of pts without transplant intent, 62 (8%) received transplant and 724 (92%) did not (NT). The abstract focuses on TT and NT groups only. NT pts tended to be older and have more advanced ISS staging and higher β2-microglobulin levels than TT pts (Table). The most common triplet regimen given during the first course treatment (within 56 days) was lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVd). RVd was administered to 34% of the NT pts (76/225) and 59% of the TT pts (152/257). The most common non-triplet regimen was bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd), which was given to 31% of NT pts (156/499) and 38% of TT pts (73/194). Within the NT group, pts given triplet Tx had a lower risk of death than those who did not receive triplet Tx (P = .0013). The multivariable analysis found triplet Tx to be associated with a 36% reduced risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.64 [95% CI, 0.50-0.82]; P = .001). ISS disease stage (HR = 1.43 [95% CI, 1.21-1.69]; P < .001) and history of diabetes (HR = 1.38 [95% CI, 1.08-1.78]; P = .012) were negative prognostic factors for OS. Within the TT group, pts who received triplet Tx did not attain an OS benefit (P = .8993), and no baseline characteristics were significantly associated with OS. These results may be limited by other factors not considered that may have influenced physicians' choice of treatment, including the use of maintenance therapy and a short follow-up period of 33.8 months. Conclusions: Triplet Tx as a first regimen is associated with longer OS in pts without transplant intent who did not receive a transplant. RVd and Vd were the most common first Tx regimens, respectively. Continued follow-up of these pts and enrollment of an additional cohort will provide additional data with mature follow-up. Table 1. Table 1. Disclosures Shah: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Array: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Abonour:Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Mehta:Celgene Corporation: Speakers Bureau. Terebelo:Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacylics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gasparetto:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Other: Export Board Committee, Speakers Bureau. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Hardin:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Srinivasan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Larkins:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Nagarwala:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rifkin:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: 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.

scholarly journals Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Bortezomib in Two Different Induction Therapies for Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma – Subgroup Analysis from the GMMG-MM5 Trial

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3475-3475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maximilian Merz ◽  
Hans Salwender ◽  
Mathias Hänel ◽  
Uta Bertsch ◽  
Christina Kunz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Induction Therapy ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Group Iv ◽  
Route Of Administration ◽  
Prolonged Treatment ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
The Impact

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.

scholarly journals The Impact of Fractures on Survival in Multiple Myeloma: Results from a Population-Based Study

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4490-4490
Author(s):  
Sigrun Thorsteinsdottir ◽  
Ingigerdur S Sverrisdottir ◽  
Gauti Gislason ◽  
Ola Landgren ◽  
Ingemar Turesson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Population Based Study ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Introduction Multiple myeloma (MM) causes lytic bone lesions, osteopenia, and fractures, which increase the morbidity of MM patients. Results from small previous studies have indicated that fractures in MM have a negative effect on survival. Aims The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of fractures on survival in MM patients diagnosed in Sweden in the years 1990-2013. Furthermore, to analyze the effect of bone fractures at MM diagnosis on subsequent survival. Methods Patients diagnosed with MM in 1990-2013 were identified from the Swedish Cancer Registry. Information on date of birth, diagnosis, and death were collected from the Registry of Total Population. Information on all fractures were retrieved from the Swedish Patient Registry. Cox regression model was used with fractures as time-dependent variables. The effect of fractures on survival was assessed for any fracture or a subtype of fracture (a specific bone fracture or ICD-coded pathologic fracture). Either first fracture or the first subtype of fracture was used in the analysis. The effect of a fracture at MM diagnosis (within 30 days before or 30 days after MM diagnosis) on survival was also estimated using a Cox regression model. All models were adjusted for age, sex, time of diagnosis, and previous fractures. Results A total of 14,008 patients were diagnosed with MM in the study period. A total of 4,141 (29.6%) patients developed a fracture including fractures that occurred within a year before MM diagnosis and thereafter. Hereof 2,893 (20.7%) patients developed a fracture after MM diagnosis. The risk of death was significantly increased for patients that developed a fracture after the time of MM diagnosis with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.00 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.91-2.10) for all fractures combined. The risk of death was significantly increased for patients that developed all subtypes of fractures after MM diagnosis except ankle fractures. The risk of death was significantly increased for patients that developed pathologic fractures (HR=2.17; 95% CI 2.03-2.32), vertebral fractures (HR=1.73; 95% CI 1.61-1.87), hip fractures (HR=1.99; 95% CI 1.82-2.18), femoral fractures (HR=2.62; 95% CI 2.32-2.98), humerus fractures (HR=2.57; 95% CI 2.32-2.86), forearm fractures (HR=1.24; 95% CI 1.05-1.46), and rib fractures (HR=1.52; 95% CI 1.31-1.77), but not for ankle fractures (HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.79-1.44). A total of 942 (6.7%) of all MM patients were diagnosed with a fracture within 30 days before or 30 days after MM diagnosis. The patients with a fracture at diagnosis were at a significantly increased risk of death compared to those without (HR 1.31; 95% CI 1.21-1.41; Figure) Conclusions Our large population-based study, including over 14,000 patients diagnosed with MM in Sweden in the years 1990-2013, showed that MM patients that developed a fracture after the time of diagnosis were at twofold increased risk of dying compared to MM patients without a fracture. Furthermore, MM patients with a fracture at diagnosis had a 30% higher risk of dying compared to patients without a fracture. Our results indicate that fractures in MM reflect a more advanced disease at diagnosis and stress the importance of managing MM bone disease in all MM patients. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Landgren: Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding.

scholarly journals A Novel Approach to Risk Stratification in Multiple Myeloma Using ISS Stage and FISH

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1800-1800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaji K. Kumar ◽  
Patricia Greipp ◽  
Morie A Gertz ◽  
Angela Dispenzieri ◽  
Linda B Baughn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Final Model ◽  
Survival Table ◽  
The Impact ◽  
1Q Gain

Background: A variety of risk factors have been described in multiple myeloma and current risk assessment incorporates ISS stage with specific FISH results and serum LDH (R-ISS). However, this model does not include all the current abnormalities described as prognostic for survival in multiple myeloma. Importantly, the impact of many of these high-risk abnormalities are not uniform. We examined if we can better integrate FISH results into a risk assessment tool to better predict the outcomes of newly diagnosed MM. Patients and methods: We studied a cohort of 1316 patients with FISH done within 6 months of diagnosis of MM, in whom results for commonly observed abnormalities were available. We specifically examined the individual impact of common translocations involving chromosome 14, MYC rearrangements, chromosome 1q gain (single or multiple duplication) and del13q/monosomy 13. A risk assessment system was developed, weighting each abnormality according to their Risk Ratio and integrating ISS stage and serum LDH into the final model construction. Overall survival was calculated from diagnosis, with those alive at last follow up being censored. Results: We first examined the impact of each of the above FISH abnormalities: 1) high risk translocations [t(4;14), t(14;16), or t(14,20)], 2) trisomies, 3) t(11;14), 4) MYCrearrangements, 5) del13q/monosomy 13, and 6) 1q gain . Each of the abnormalities, except for t(11;14), was prognostic for survival (Table 1 with the risk ratios). For 1q gain, the median OS was NR, 105 mos and 79 mos respectively for no abnormality, duplication of 1 copy and duplication of multiple copies, (p<0.001). On multivariate analysis, t(11;14) and trisomies were no longer prognostic for overall survival (Table 1). The cumulative impact of abnormalities demonstrated worsening survival in the presence of increasing numbers of abnormalities (Figure 1). Including ISS stage 3 and LDH > ULN as additional variables for prognostication indicated both were individually prognostic for OS. In a multivariate analysis, including these two and FISH abnormalities, 1q gain and LDH were not independently prognostic. The final model consisted of HR translocations, MYCrearrangements, del17p/monosomy 17, del13q/monosomy 13, and ISS stage 3. Each of these variables was weighted using their risk ratio and a composite score was developed using 998 patients for whom all variables were available (range: 0-7.9; median 1.8). Three patient groups were characterized: group 1 (0; 32%), group 2 (1-4; 58%) and group 3 (>4; 10%) with a median OS of 53 mos, 106 mos, and NR, respectively, p <0.001 (Figure 2). Conclusion: Using the most relevant FISH and laboratory factors, in a large cohort of patients, we refined the current system to develop a risk stratification system that predicts survival in patients with newly diagnosed MM treated with contemporary treatment regimens. This needs validation in future studies. Disclosures Kumar: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gertz:International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding; Annexon: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding; Abbvie: Other: personal fees for Data Safety Monitoring board; i3Health: Other: Development of educational programs and materials; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; Alnylam: Consultancy; Prothena Biosciences Inc: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Appellis: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy. Dispenzieri:Akcea: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy. Leung:Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Omeros: Research Funding; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bergsagel:Celgene: Consultancy; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy.

scholarly journals Long Term Outcome of Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (Rd) Vs Melphalan-Lenalidomide-Prednisone (MPR) Vs Cyclophosphamide-Prednisone-Lenalidomide (CPR) As Induction Followed By Lenalidomide-Prednisone (RP) Vs Lenalidomide (R) As Maintenance in a Community-Based Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Population: Updated Analysis of EMN01 Phase III Study

Blood ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 130 (Suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 901-901
Author(s):  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Massimo Offidani ◽  
Pellegrino Musto ◽  
Anna Marina Liberati ◽  
Giulia Benevolo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

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.

scholarly journals VTE Rates and Safety Analysis of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients Receiving Carfilzomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (KRD) with or without Rivaroxaban Prophylaxis

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1835-1835 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina M Piedra ◽  
Hani Hassoun ◽  
Larry W. Buie ◽  
Sean M. Devlin ◽  
Jessica Flynn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Cancer Trial ◽  
Oncology Research ◽  
Increased Risk

Introduction Immunomodulatory agents (IMiD's) are associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), particularly when combined with high dose steroids. Studies evaluating the use of lenalidomide-bortezomib-dexamethasone (RVD) and carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (KRD) in the frontline setting for multiple myeloma (MM) have reported a 6% and 24% incidence of thrombosis, respectively, despite primary thrombotic prophylaxis with aspirin (ASA) (Richardson, et al. Blood. 2010; Korde, et al. JAMA Oncol 2015). Recent data, including the Hokusai VTE Cancer Trial, have suggested that safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are preserved in the setting of treatment of solid malignancy-associated thrombosis (Raskob, et al. N Engl J Med. 2018; Mantha, et al. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2017). Despite this data, there is limited experience and use of DOACs in prevention of thromboses in the setting of hematologic malignancies, specifically MM. After careful review of literature, since early 2018, we changed our clinical practice and routinely placed newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) patients receiving KRD at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) on concomitant rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily, regardless of VTE risk stratification. In the following abstract, we present VTE rates and safety data for newly diagnosed MM patients receiving RVD with ASA vs. KRD with ASA vs. KRD with rivaroxaban prophylaxis. Methods This was an IRB-approved, single-center, retrospective chart review study. All untreated patients with newly diagnosed MM, receiving at least one cycle of RVD or KRD between January 2015 and October 2018 were included. The period of observation included the time between the first day of therapy until 90 days after completion of induction therapy. Patients were identified by querying the pharmacy database for carfilzomib or bortezomib administration and outpatient medication review of thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban or ASA. VTE diagnoses were confirmed by ICD-10 codes and appropriate imaging studies (computed tomography and ultrasound). Descriptive statistics were performed. Results During the observation period, 241 patients were identified to have received RVD or KRD in the frontline (99 RVD with ASA; 97 KRD with ASA; 45 KRD with rivaroxaban). Baseline characteristics were well distributed among the three arms, with a median age of 60 (30-94) in the RVD ASA arm, 62 (33-77) in the KRD ASA arm, and 60 (24-79) in the KRD rivaroxaban arm. Patients had International Staging System (ISS) stage 3 disease in 13% (N=13), 9.3% (N=9), and 11% (N=5) of the RVD ASA, KRD ASA, and KRD rivaroxaban arms, respectively. Median weekly doses of dexamethasone were higher in both KRD arms, 40 mg (20-40) vs. 20 mg (10-40) in the RVD ASA arm. The average initial doses of lenalidomide were 22 mg in the RVD ASA arm compared to 25 mg in both the KRD ASA and KRD rivaroxaban arms. After querying the pharmacy database, no patients were identified to have a history or concomitant use of erythropoietin stimulating agent (ESA) use. Treatment-related VTE's occurred in 4 patients (4.0%) in the RVD ASA arm, 16 patients (16.5%) in the KRD ASA arm, and in 1 patient (2.2%) in the KRD rivaroxaban arm. Average time to VTE was 6.15 months (Range 5.42, 9.73) after treatment initiation in the RVD ASA group, while it was 2.61 months (Range 0.43, 5.06) in the KRD ASA group and 1.35 months in the KRD rivaroxaban group. Minor, grade 1 bleeding events per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) were identified in 1 (1.1%) patient in the RVD ASA arm, 5 (5.2%) patients in the KRD ASA arm, and 1 (2.2%) patient in the KRD rivaroxaban arm. Conclusion More efficacious MM combination therapies have been found to increase the risk of VTE when using ASA prophylaxis, indicating better thromboprophylaxis is needed. We found patients receiving ASA prophylaxis with KRD were more likely to experience a VTE and these events occurred earlier compared to patients receiving ASA prophylaxis with RVD. Importantly, the rate of VTE was reduced to the same level as ASA prophylaxis with RVD when low-dose rivaroxaban 10 mg daily was used with KRD, and without necessarily increasing bleeding risk. Our retrospective data support the development of prospective clinical trials further investigating DOAC use in thromboprophylaxis for NDMM patients receiving carfilzomib-based treatments. Figure Disclosures Hassoun: Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Lesokhin:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; GenMab: Consultancy, Honoraria; Serametrix Inc.: Patents & Royalties; Genentech: Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mailankody:Juno: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; CME activity by Physician Education Resource: Honoraria. Smith:Celgene: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Fate Therapeutics and Precision Biosciences: Consultancy. Landgren:Theradex: Other: IDMC; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, 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; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Other: IDMC; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Off-label use of rivaroxaban for outpatient prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) will be explicitly disclosed to the audience.

scholarly journals Beta-Blockers Improved Survival Outcomes in Patients with Multiple Myeloma: A Retrospective Evaluation

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 3306-3306
Author(s):  
Yi L. Hwa ◽  
Qian Shi ◽  
Shaji Kumar ◽  
Martha Q. Lacy ◽  
Morie A. Gertz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Mayo Clinic ◽  
Cumulative Incidence ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Cardiac Medication

Abstract Introduction: A recent study revealed an antiproliferative and apoptotic effect of propranolol on multiple myeloma (MM) cells. Our previous small matched case-control study showed longer survival in patients with propranolol and other beta-blockers (BB) intake than those without. This larger scale study was conducted to confirm the positive association of BB and MM survival. Methods: We identified 1971 newly diagnosed pts seen at Mayo Clinic between 1995 and 2010. Cardiac medication usage after diagnosis of MM was extracted from patient records and categorized based on BB intake. Cause of death was collected with death due to MM as the primary interest event and death due to cardiac disease or other reasons as competing risk events. The primary outcomes were MM disease-specific survival (DSS) and overall survival (OS). Cumulative incidence functions and Kaplan-Meier method were used to estimate the 5-year cumulative incidence rate (CIR) of MM death and OS rate, respectively. DSS and OS were compared by Gray's test and log-rank test, respectively. Multivarable Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the adjusted cause-specific HR (HRCSadj.) and hazard ratio (HRadj.) for DSS and OS, respectively, adjusting for demographics, disease characteristics, diagnosis year, and various chemotherapies. Results: 930 (47.2%) of MM patients had no intake of any cardiac medications; 260 (13.2%) had BB only; 343 (17.4%) used both BB / non-BB cardiac medications; and 438 patients (22.2%) had non-BB cardiac drugs. Five-year CIR of MM death and OS rate were shown in table. Superior MM DSS was observed for BB only users, compared to patients without any cardiac drugs (HRCSadj., .53, 95% confidence interval [CI], .42-.67, padj.<.0001) and non-BB cardiac drugs users (HRCSadj., .49, 95% CI, .38-.63, padj.<.0001). Patients received both BB and other cardiac drugs also showed superior MM DSS than non-cardiac drugs users (HRCSadj.., .54, 95% CI, .44-.67, padj.<.0001) and non-BB cardiac drug users. (HRCSadj., .50, 95% CI, .40-.62, padj.<.0001). MM DSS does not differ between BB users with and without other cardiac drugs (padj.=0.90). Multivariable analysis showed the same pattern for OS. None of the MM therapies impacted the differences in DSS and OS among BB intake groups (interaction padj.>.60). Conclusion: MM patients with BB intake showed reduced risk of death due to MM and overall mortality compared to patients who used non-BB cardiac or never used cardiac drugs. The result warrants further investigation for anti-cancer effect of BB in MM. Disclosures Shi: Mayo Clinic: Employment. Kumar:Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Kesios: Consultancy. Gertz:NCI Frederick: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Med Learning Group: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Research to Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Alnylam Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Prothena Therapeutics: Research Funding; Ionis: Research Funding; Annexon Biosciences: Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Sandoz Inc: Honoraria. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:pfizer: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; Jannsen: Research Funding; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Metaphase Cytogenetics for Risk Stratification in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4396-4396
Author(s):  
Patrick Mellors ◽  
Moritz Binder ◽  
Rhett P. Ketterling ◽  
Patricia Griepp ◽  
Linda B Baughn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Risk Modeling ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Cytogenetic Abnormalities ◽  
Improve Risk Stratification

Introduction: Abnormal metaphase cytogenetics are associated with inferior survival in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). These abnormalities are only detected in one third of cases due to the low proliferative rate of plasma cells. It is unknown if metaphase cytogenetics improve risk stratification when using contemporary prognostic models such as the revised international staging system (R-ISS), which incorporates interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Aims: The aims of this study were to 1) characterize the association between abnormalities on metaphase cytogenetics and overall survival (OS) in newly diagnosed MM treated with novel agents and 2) evaluate whether the addition of metaphase cytogenetics to R-ISS, age, and plasma cell labeling index (PCLI) improves model discrimination with respect to OS. Methods: We analyzed a retrospective cohort of 483 newly diagnosed MM patients treated with proteasome inhibitors (PI) and/or immunomodulators (IMID) who had metaphase cytogenetics performed prior to initiation of therapy. Abnormal metaphase cytogenetics were defined as MM specific abnormalities, while normal metaphase cytogenetics included constitutional cytogenetic variants, age-related Y chromosome loss, and normal metaphase karyotypes. Multivariable adjusted proportional hazards regression models were fit for the association between known prognostic factors and OS. Covariates associated with inferior OS on multivariable analysis included R-ISS stage, age ≥ 70, PCLI ≥ 2, and abnormal metaphase cytogenetics. We devised a risk scoring system weighted by their respective hazard ratios (R-ISS II +1, R-ISS III + 2, age ≥ 70 +2, PCLI ≥ 2 +1, metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities + 1). Low (LR), intermediate (IR), and high risk (HR) groups were established based on risk scores of 0-1, 2-3, and 4-5 in modeling without metaphase cytogenetics, and scores of 0-1, 2-3, and 4-6 in modeling incorporating metaphase cytogenetics, respectively. Survival estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Survival analysis was stratified by LR, IR, and HR groups in models 1) excluding metaphase cytogenetics 2) including metaphase cytogenetics and 3) including metaphase cytogenetics, with IR stratified by presence and absence of metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities. Survival estimates were compared between groups using the log-rank test. Harrell's C was used to compare the predictive power of risk modeling with and without metaphase cytogenetics. Results: Median age at diagnosis was 66 (31-95), 281 patients (58%) were men, median follow up was 5.5 years (0.04-14.4), and median OS was 6.4 years (95% CI 5.7-6.8). Ninety-seven patients (20%) were R-ISS stage I, 318 (66%) stage II, and 68 (14%) stage III. One-hundred and fourteen patients (24%) had high-risk abnormalities by FISH, and 115 (24%) had abnormal metaphase cytogenetics. Three-hundred and thirteen patients (65%) received an IMID, 119 (25%) a PI, 51 (10%) received IMID and PI, and 137 (28%) underwent upfront autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT). On multivariable analysis, R-ISS (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.29-1.97, p < 0.001), age ≥ 70 (HR 2.32, 95% CI 1.83-2.93, p < 0.001), PCLI ≥ 2, (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.16-2.00, p=0.002) and abnormalities on metaphase cytogenetics (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.05-1.75, p=0.019) were associated with inferior OS. IR and HR groups experienced significantly worse survival compared to LR groups in models excluding (Figure 1A) and including (Figure 1B) the effect of metaphase cytogenetics (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). However, the inclusion of metaphase cytogenetics did not improve discrimination. Likewise, subgroup analysis of IR patients by the presence or absence of metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities did not improve risk stratification (Figure 1C) (p < 0.001). The addition of metaphase cytogenetics to risk modeling with R-ISS stage, age ≥ 70, and PCLI ≥ 2 did not improve prognostic performance when evaluated by Harrell's C (c=0.636 without cytogenetics, c=0.642 with cytogenetics, absolute difference 0.005, 95% CI 0.002-0.012, p=0.142). Conclusions: Abnormalities on metaphase cytogenetics at diagnosis are associated with inferior OS in MM when accounting for the effects of R-ISS, age, and PCLI. However, the addition of metaphase cytogenetics to prognostic modeling incorporating these covariates did not significantly improve risk stratification. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Akcea: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding. Leung:Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Omeros: Research Funding; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

New US Myeloma Registry (Connect MM® – The Multiple Myeloma Disease Registry): Features of Newly Diagnosed Patients In 2010

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 5032-5032
Author(s):  
Brian G. M. Durie ◽  
Jatin J. Shah ◽  
Rafat Abonour ◽  
Cristina Gasperetto ◽  
Jayesh Mehta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Staging System ◽  
Bone Lesions ◽  
Case Report Form ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Prior Therapy

Abstract Abstract 5032 Background: In the past decade, with the availability of novel therapies, the paradigm for myeloma management has changed. In 2010 it is especially important to understand baseline features and initial treatment decisions. The goal of the Connect MM® registry is to characterize patients with newly diagnosed active myeloma from 200 US sites. Approximately 80% of the patient population will be enrolled from community-based practices and 20% from academic centers. An electronic case report form was developed to collect clinical data, physician choices, patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and response, as well as data on survival end points. This is a prospective, observational, longitudinal study with a target accrual of 1,500 patients in 3 years, with a 5 year follow-up from the time of informed consent. There are no mandated treatments or clinical assessments. However, there are data collection requirements for diagnosis and disease monitoring. Results: Since late 2009, 340 patients from 135 sites have been accrued and were included in this interim analysis. Current study demographics include: 60% male, 83% white, and 14% black, with a median age of 67 years. Thus far, 97% have been enrolled from community-based practices. All patients met study enrollment criteria and had active myeloma at entry; prior monoclonal gammopathy of unknown significance (MGUS) was reported in 13% and smoldering MM in 8%. International Staging System (ISS) staging for evaluable patients were 26.3%, 36.4%, 37.3% for stages I, II, and III, respectively. Durie-Salmon Stage (A or B) were 13%, 35%, 52% for stages I, II, and III, respectively. Staging procedures included 82% skeletal survey; 44% computed tomography (CT); 40% magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); 7% positron emission tomography (PET); 2% PET/CT; and 4% had no imaging. International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) CRAB criteria were assessed in all enrolled patients; 9% had hypercalcemia, 18% renal insufficiency, 36% anemia, and 66% had bone lesions. Median values were: calcium 9.5 mg/dL; serum creatinine 1.1 mg/dL; hemoglobin 10.9 gm/dL. Only 9% of patients had 3 or 4 CRAB features, while 49% had only 1 feature and 26% were asymptomatic (ECOG=0). The incidence of baseline peripheral neuropathy was 6%. Initial pain led to radiation therapy for 10% of patients, with 16% having vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty. Cytogenetic studies were performed at baseline in 64% of patients and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) studies in 54%. Cytogenetics and FISH were normal in 27% of patients, while in 20% both were abnormal in patients who had both performed. FISH was abnormal with normal cytogenetics in 41% and only 2% had normal FISH but abnormal cytogenetics. The most common FISH abnormalities were: 13 q- (31%), 17 p- (28%), t(4; 14) (16%). Freelite® testing was performed in 56% of patients with an abnormal ratio in 94% [rFLC]. Of evaluable patients receiving frontline therapy 98% of patients received a novel agent and only 3 patients (1.4% of treated patients) received melphalan/prednisone. Two drug combinations were used in 53%, 3 drugs in 26%, 4 drugs in 1.3%, and single agents were used in 21% of the patients. The most common regimens were: bortezomib+dexamethasone (28%), lenalidomide+dexamethasone (20%), and bortezomib+lenalidomide+ dexamethasone (15%). Conclusion: These baseline features and treatment choices characterize myeloma patients primarily in community-based practices in the US in 2010. As academic centers enroll more patients, we will be able to further characterize that population. Of particular note, 26% of patients were asymptomatic at baseline but had biochemical evidence of myeloma and met enrollment criteria; conversely 95% had an abnormal rFLC and 73% had abnormal chromosome results. The Connect MM® registry will provide data regarding patient features as they pertain to patterns in testing and treatment in the clinical practice setting, as well as response and survival outcomes. Disclosures: Durie: Celgene & Millennium: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Revlimid (lenalidomide) in combination with dexamethasone is indicated for the treatment of multiple myeloma patients who have received at least one prior therapy. Shah:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Abonour:Celgene & Millennium: Honoraria. Gasperetto:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Mehta:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda/Millennium: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Research Funding. Pashos:Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Swern:Celgene: Employment. Street:Celgene: Employment. Sullivan:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rifkin:Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Cephalon: Speakers Bureau; Dendreon: Speakers Bureau.

ENESTnd Update: Nilotinib (NIL) Vs Imatinib (IM) In Patients (pts) With Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia In Chronic Phase (CML-CP) and The Impact Of Early Molecular Response (EMR) and Sokal Risk At Diagnosis On Long-Term Outcomes

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 92-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Saglio ◽  
Andreas Hochhaus ◽  
Timothy P. Hughes ◽  
Richard E. Clark ◽  
Hirohisa Nakamae ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Eligibility Criterion ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Vascular Events ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Introduction Frontline NIL continues to show benefit over IM in pts with Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) CML-CP, with higher rates of major molecular response (MMR; BCR-ABLIS ≤ 0.1%) and MR4.5 (BCR-ABLIS ≤ 0.0032%), lower rates of progression to accelerated phase (AP)/blast crisis (BC) and fewer new BCR-ABL mutations on treatment in the Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Trials–Newly Diagnosed Pts (ENESTnd) trial. Here, we report data with a minimum follow-up (f/u) of 4 y; updated data based on 5 y of f/u will be presented. Methods Adults with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML-CP (N = 846) were randomized to NIL 300 mg twice daily (BID; n = 282), NIL 400 mg BID (n = 281), or IM 400 mg once daily (QD; n = 283). Progression and overall survival (OS) events were collected prospectively during study f/u, including after discontinuation of study treatment. Efficacy in the NIL 300 mg BID and IM arms was evaluated based on achievement of EMR (BCR-ABLIS ≤ 10% at 3 mo). Results At 4 y, ≥ 87% of pts remained on study in each arm and 57%-69% remained on core treatment (Table). Rates of MMR and MR4.5 by 4 y were significantly higher with NIL vs IM. Significantly fewer pts progressed to AP/BC on NIL vs IM (on core treatment: 0.7%, 1.1%, and 4.2%; on study: 3.2%, 2.1%, and 6.7% [NIL 300 mg BID, NIL 400 mg BID, and IM arms, respectively]). Of 17 pts across the 3 arms who progressed on core treatment, 11 (65%) had never achieved complete cytogenetic response and none had achieved MR4.5. Fewer mutations have emerged in the NIL arms vs the IM arm; in y 4, mutations emerged in 2 pts (1 pt with T315I on NIL 300 mg BID; 1 pt with F317L on IM). More pts achieved EMR in the NIL 300 mg BID arm vs the IM arm (91% vs 67%). Pts with EMR had significantly higher rates of progression-free survival (PFS) and OS at 4 y vs pts with BCR-ABL > 10% at 3 mo. Among pts with BCR-ABL > 10% at 3 mo, more progressions to AP/BC occurred in the IM arm (n = 14) vs the NIL 300 mg BID arm (n = 2); half of these pts progressed between 3 and 6 mo. In pts with intermediate or high Sokal risk, PFS and OS at 4 y were higher in both NIL arms vs the IM arm. No new safety signals were detected. Selected cardiac and vascular events were more common on NIL vs IM (by 4 y, peripheral arterial occlusive disease [PAOD] in 4 [1.4%], 5 [1.8%], and 0 pts; ischemic heart disease [IHD] in 11 [3.9%], 14 [5.1%,] and 3 [1.1%] pts; and ischemic cerebrovascular events in 3 [1.1%], 5 [1.8%], and 1 [0.4%] pts in the NIL 300 mg BID, NIL 400 mg BID, and IM arms, respectively). In the NIL 300 mg BID arm, 2 of 11 IHD events occurred between 3 and 4 y (all 4 PAOD events occurred in the first 2 y). In the NIL 400 mg BID arm, 2 of 5 PAOD events and 3 of 14 IHD events occurred between 3 and 4 y. Most pts (7 of 9) with a PAOD event on NIL were at high risk due to a combination of baseline risk factors. Conclusions NIL, a standard-of-care frontline therapy option for newly diagnosed CML-CP pts, affords superior efficacy compared with IM, including higher rates of EMR (which is associated with improved long-term outcomes), higher rates of MR4.5 (a key eligibility criterion for many studies of treatment-free remission), and a lower risk of disease progression. NIL continues to show good tolerability with long-term f/u. While selected cardiac and vascular events (including PAOD) are slightly more frequent on NIL vs IM, no increase in annual incidence of these events over time has been observed. Disclosures: Saglio: ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Hochhaus:Ariad: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Hughes:Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; CSL: Research Funding. Clark:Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Nakamae:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau, travel/ accomodations/ meeting expenses Other. Kim:BMS, Novartis,IL-Yang: Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Etienne:Pfizer: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ariad: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Flinn:Novartis: Research Funding. Lipton:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Moiraghi:Bristol Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Fan:Novartis: Employment. Menssen:Novartis: Employment. Kantarjian:Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding. Larson:Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document