scholarly journals Subsequent Primary Malignancies Among Multiple Myeloma Patients Treated with or without Lenalidomide

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 2129-2129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana E Rollison ◽  
Rami Komrokji ◽  
Ji-Hyun Lee ◽  
Shalaka S Hampras ◽  
William Fulp ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: The incidence of subsequent primary malignancies (SPM) associated with lenalidomide treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) outside the context of maintenance therapy post-melphalan is unknown. Three clinical trials reported modest, statistically significant increased risks of SPM associated with lenalidomide treatment in MM patients (Palumbo et al, N Engl J Med, 2012; Attal et al, N Engl J Med, 2012; McCarthy et al, N Engl J Med, 2012). Although these randomized trials are well controlled for potential confounders, they represent a unique population of patients and a specific juxtaposition of lenalidomide use with melphalan; as such, their results are not necessarily generalizable to the broader MM patient population. To investigate whether lenalidomide is associated with an increased risk of SPM in MM patients within a clinical setting in the United States, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1,653 MM patients treated with or without lenalidomide at the Moffitt Cancer Center (“MCC”) in Tampa, FL. Methods: Patients treated for MM at MCC from 2004-2012 were identified through Moffitt's enterprise wide data warehouse combining clinical information from several sources, including the Cancer Registry, electronic medical records and disease-specific databases. Among 1,653 MM patients, ages 18 and older, 51 cases of SPM were verified by two hematologists for confirmation of MM and SPM diagnoses. Incidence rates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for SPM were estimated using a Poisson distribution. Cox proportional hazards ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were calculated to estimate the age-adjusted association between lenalidomide treatment and SPM in the overall cohort, and stratified by ISS. Additional details on lenalidomide treatment and potential confounders were obtained through medical chart abstraction for SPM cases and a subset of MM patients from the baseline cohort who had not developed SPM; these controls were matched to cases 2:1 on age at MM diagnosis (+/- 5 years), gender, follow-up time (+/- 6 months), and date of diagnosis (+/- 1 year). Associations between lenalidomide and SPM in the nested case-control analysis were estimated using odds ratios (OR) and 95% CIs adjusted for age at MM diagnosis, bone marrow transplantation, creatinine levels and personal history of cancer. Results: Overall, 1,653 MM patients were followed for an average of 40 months, including patients treated with (n=846) or without (n=807) lenalidomide. Incident SPMs were observed for 15 patients treated with lenalidomide (0.55 per 100 person-years) and 36 patients treated without lenalidomide (1.27 per 100 person-years), corresponding to an HR of 0.44 (95% CI=0.24-0.80) (Figure 1). Of the 51 SPMs observed, 37 were solid tumors comprising 14 different types, including 9 and 28 in the lenalidomide and no lenalidomide groups, respectively (HR=0.55, 95% CI=0.15-0.69). Of the 14 hematological SPMs observed, 8 were in the lenalidomide group versus 6 in the no lenalidomide group (HR=0.90, 95%CI = 0.31-2.63). Similar associations between lenalidomide and SPM were observed for MM patients with ISS = 1 (HR=0.26, 95% CI=0.06-1.21) and for MM patients with ISS = 2 or 3 (HR=0.20, 95% CI=0.02-1.62). Of the 51 SPM cases and 102 matched controls included in the nested case-control analysis, 33.3% and 74.5% were treated with lenalidomide, respectively (adjusted OR=0.03, 95% CI=0.002-0.34). Similar associations were observed for lenalidomide given as part of first line treatment versus subsequent treatment, and for lenalidomide given alone or in combination with other drugs. (8 cases and 46 controls received melphalan in addition to lenalidomide.) There was no association between lenalidomide and SPM among those treated for >9.1 months (OR=0.05, 95% CI=0.01-0.43), the median treatment duration among controls. Conclusion: Lenalidomide treatment was not associated with an increased risk of SPM among a large cohort of MM patients. It is important to note that in this clinical setting (in 2004-2012) the use of lenalidomide in combination with melphalan and in the maintenance setting was a rare event. This may be a critical factor in the contrast between the results of this study and in the increase in SPMs reported in randomized clinical trials. Figure 1: Incidence of SPM among patients treated for MM with or without lenalidomide, Moffitt Cancer Center, 2004-2012 Figure 1:. Incidence of SPM among patients treated for MM with or without lenalidomide, Moffitt Cancer Center, 2004-2012 Disclosures Rollison: Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide given as treatment for non-del(5q) MDS and/or multiple myeloma . Komrokji:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lee:Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Hampras:Celgene, Inc: Research Funding. Fulp:Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Fisher:Celgene, Inc: Research Funding. Baz:Celgene: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Olesnyckyj:Celgene: Employment, stock options Other. Kenvin:Celgene: Employment, stock options Other. Knight:Celgene, Inc: Employment, stock options Other. Dalton:Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Shain:L&M Healthcare/Onyx/Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Envision/Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 413-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana E Rollison ◽  
Kenneth H. Shain ◽  
Ji-Hyun Lee ◽  
Shalaka S Hampras ◽  
Kate Fisher ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Lenalidomide is approved by the FDA for treatment of transfusion-dependent, lower risk, deletion 5q (del(5q)) MDS patients and used widely in practice for non-del(5q) MDS patients with anemia. Recently, subsequent primary malignancies (SPM) have been reported to be associated with lenalidomide treatment of multiple myeloma, and it is unclear if this observation is disease-specific or more broadly related to a particular therapy. The SPM risk in lenalidomide-treated MDS patients has not been evaluated previously. To investigate whether lenalidomide is associated with an increased risk of SPM in MDS patients, we conducted a large, retrospective cohort study of 1,248 MDS patients treated with or without lenalidomide at the Moffitt Cancer Center (MCC). Methods: Patients treated for MDS at MCC in 2004-2012 were identified through MCC's enterprise wide data warehouse which combined clinical information from a variety of sources, including the Cancer Registry, electronic medical records and disease-specific databases. A total of 1,248 MDS patients, ages 18+ years, were identified, corresponding to International Classification of Diseases for Oncology Third Edition (ICD-O-3) codes 99801, 99803, 99833, 99843, 99853, 99863, 99873, 99891 and 99893. A total of 41 cases of SPM were verified by two hematologists for confirmation of both the baseline MDS diagnosis and the SPM diagnosis. SPM incidence rates were estimated based on the Poisson distribution. Cox proportional hazards ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to estimate the age-adjusted association between lenalidomide treatment and SPM in the overall cohort, and stratified by lower versus higher risk IPSS. To obtain additional details on lenalidomide treatment and potential confounders, medical chart abstraction was conducted for all SPM cases in addition to a sample of MDS patients from the baseline cohort who had not developed SPM; these controls were matched to cases 1:1 on age at MDS diagnosis (<60 versus 60+ years), gender, follow-up time (+/- 6 months), date of diagnosis, (+/- 1 year), lower versus higher risk IPSS, and presence or absence of del (5q). Based on the medical record data abstracted for the nested case-control sample, associations between lenalidomide and SPM were estimated using odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI's calculated through conditional logistic regression, with adjustment for age at diagnosis, use of erythroid-stimulating agents (ESA), use of azacitidine and MDS histology. Results: Overall, 1,248 MDS patients were followed for an average of 30 months, including patients treated with (n=210) or without (n=1,038) lenalidomide. Incident SPM's were observed for 5 patients treated with lenalidomide (0.7 per 100 person-years) and 36 patients treated without lenalidomide (1.4 per 100 person-years), corresponding to an age-adjusted HR of 0.53 (95% CI=0.21-1.36) (Figure 1). Of the 41 SPM's observed, 33 were solid tumors comprised of 15 types, and 8 were hematological malignancies other than AML; no differences in SPM risk were observed by type of SPM. When stratified by IPSS, there was no increased risk of SPM observed for patients with low risk or intermediate-1 MDS (HR=0.36, 95% CI=0.11-1.20) nor for patients with intermediate-2 and high risk MDS (HR=2.30, 95% CI=0.45-11.65). Of the 41 SPM cases and 41 matched controls included in the nested case-control analysis, 12.2% (n=5) and 29.3% (n=12) were treated with lenalidomide, respectively, corresponding to an adjusted OR of 0.03 (95% CI=0.01-0.63). Similar associations were observed for lenalidomide whether given as part of first line treatment or subsequent therapy, and for lenalidomide given alone or in combination with other drugs. Conclusion: To our knowledge this is the first report to address rate of SPM among MDS patients treated with lenalidomide. SPM was not associated with lenalidomide treatment among a large cohort of patients with a broad spectrum of MDS diagnoses. Figure 1: Incidence of subsequent primary malignancies (SPM) among patients treated for myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with or without lenalidomide, Moffitt Cancer Center 2004-2012 Figure 1:. Incidence of subsequent primary malignancies (SPM) among patients treated for myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with or without lenalidomide, Moffitt Cancer Center 2004-2012 Disclosures Rollison: Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide for the treatment of non-del(5q) MDS and/or multiple myeloma. Shain:Envision/Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; L&M Healthcare/Onyx/Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Lee:Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Hampras:Celgene, Inc: Research Funding. Fisher:Celgene, Inc: Research Funding. Al Ali:Celgene, Inc: Research Funding. Padron:Icyte: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Lancet:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Olesnyckyj:Celgene: Employment, stock options Other. Kenvin:Celgene: Employment, stock options Other. Knight:Celgene, Inc: Employment, stock options Other. Dalton:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. List:Celgene, Inc.: Consultancy. Komrokji:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 1912-1912
Author(s):  
Dana E Rollison ◽  
Kenneth H. Shain ◽  
Ji-Hyun Lee ◽  
Shalaka S Hampras ◽  
William Fulp ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Lenalidomide is currently approved by the FDA for treatment of transfusion-dependent, lower risk, deletion 5q (del(5q)) MDS patients. In practice, lenalidomide is often used for treatment of non-del(5q) anemic, lower risk MDS patients as endorsed by national guidelines. The risk of AML transformation among non-del(5q) MDS patients treated with lenalidomide has not been well studied, nor among del(5q) MDS patients outside the context of original clinical trials. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1,248 MDS patients treated with or without lenalidomide at the Moffitt Cancer Center (MCC) to investigate the association between lenalidomide and AML transformation. Methods: Patients treated for MDS at MCC in 2004-2012 were identified through MCC's data warehouse, including data from the Cancer Registry, electronic medical records and disease-specific databases. A total of 1,248 MDS patients, ages 18+ years, were identified, corresponding to International Classification of Diseases for Oncology Third Edition (ICD-O-3) codes 99801, 99803, 99833, 99843, 99853, 99863, 99873, 99891 and 99893. A total of 150 cases of AML transformation were verified by two hematologists confirming the MDS diagnosis and AML transformation. Incidence rates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for AML transformation were estimated based on the Poisson distribution. Cox proportional hazards ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were calculated to estimate age-adjusted associations between lenalidomide treatment and AML transformation in the overall cohort, and stratified by lower (low and intermediate-1) risk versus higher (intermediate-2 and high) risk IPSS. To obtain additional details on lenalidomide treatment and potential confounders, medical chart abstraction was conducted for all AML cases and a sample of MDS patients from the baseline cohort who had not developed AML; these controls were matched to cases 1:1 on age at MDS diagnosis (<60 versus 60+ years), gender, follow-up time (+/- 6 months), date of diagnosis, (+/- 1 year), lower versus higher risk IPSS, and presence or absence of del (5q). Based on the abstracted data for the nested case-control sample, associations between lenalidomide and AML transformation were adjusted for cytogenetic risk, use of erythroid-stimulating agents (ESA), percent bone marrow myeloblasts, and MDS histology. Results: Overall, 1,248 MDS patients were followed for an average of 30 months, including patients treated with (n=210) or without (n=1,038) lenalidomide. AML transformation was observed among 16 patients treated with lenalidomide (2.4 per 100 person-years) and 134 patients treated without lenalidomide (5.5 per 100 person-years), corresponding to an age-adjusted HR of 0.44 (95% CI=0.26-0.74). Only two of the 150 MDS patients who transformed to AML had MDS del(5q). When stratified by IPSS, there was no increased risk of AML transformation associated with lenalidomide among patients with lower risk IPSS (HR=0.27, 95% CI=0.12-0.64) or patients with higher risk IPSS (HR=0.99, 95% CI=0.51-1.93). Based on the nested case-control analysis, 16.0% and 20.7% of MDS-AML cases and matched MDS controls who did not develop AML were treated with lenalidomide, respectively, corresponding to an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 1.16 (95% CI=0.52-2.56). Although a significant interaction was noted between lenalidomide and IPSS in relation to AML in the cohort analysis (Figure 1), lenalidomide was not associated with AML transformation among lower risk (OR=0.44, 95% CI=0.10-1.94) or higher risk (OR=2.06, 95% CI=0.69-6.18) MDS patients after adjustment for prognostic factors in the case-control analysis. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this study represents the largest cohort investigated outside the context of clinical trials for the rate of AML transformation among MDS patients treated with lenalidomide and the first to specifically examine non-del(5q) patients. Lenalidomide treatment was not associated with an increased risk of AML transformation among this large cohort of MDS patients. Figure 1: Incidence of acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) among myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients treated with or without lenalidomide (Lena) and stratified by lower risk IPSS (low risk or intermediate-1 [0,1]) versus higher risk IPSS (intermediate-2 or high risk [2,3]), Moffitt Cancer Center, 2004-2012 Figure 1:. Incidence of acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) among myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients treated with or without lenalidomide (Lena) and stratified by lower risk IPSS (low risk or intermediate-1 [0,1]) versus higher risk IPSS (intermediate-2 or high risk [2,3]), Moffitt Cancer Center, 2004-2012 Disclosures Rollison: Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide given as treatment for non-del(5q) MDS and/or multiple myeloma . Shain:L&M Healthcare/Onyx/Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Envision/Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Lee:Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Hampras:Celgene, Inc: Research Funding. Fulp:Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Fisher:Celgene, Inc: Research Funding. Al Ali:Celgene, Inc: Research Funding. Padron:Icyte: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Lancet:Celgene, Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding. Xu:Celgene, Inc.: Employment, stock options Other. Knight:Celgene, Inc: Employment, stock options Other. List:Celgene, Inc.: Consultancy. Dalton:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Komrokji:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 5701-5701
Author(s):  
Benjamin M Parsons ◽  
Andrew J Borgert ◽  
Angela Smith ◽  
Daniel Arndorfer

Abstract Background: Erythropoiesis Stimulating Agents (ESAs) are FDA approved for chemotherapy induced anemia and anemia of chronic kidney disease. These indications are more frequent in patients with multiple myeloma. Use of ESAs has been associated with an increased risk of heart attack, stroke, venous thromboembolism (VTE), and all-cause mortality. In patients with cancer, ESA's have been associated with worse progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) Previous research regarding ESA use in patients with multiple myeloma has been limited and conflicting. In this study, we evaluate the effects of ESA use in patients with multiple myeloma. Additionally, we examined the frequency of ESA usage after the 2007 FDA safety update revising product labeling for ESAs. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients diagnosed with active multiple myeloma between January 1st, 2000 and December 31st, 2015 at Gundersen Health System in La Crosse Wisconsin. Collected data include patient demographics, medications, lab tests, comorbidities, and the dates of any VTE, stroke, or myocardial infarction. Both a logistic regression and a matched case-control analysis were used to compare rates of complications in patients using ESAs to those that did not. ESA effect on median survival time was also calculated for each International Staging System (ISS) stage of disease. Results:There were 278 patients included for demographic analysis (Table 1), of which 268 were included in the logistic regression analysis and 124 (62 pairs) in the matched case-control analysis. A logistic regression model constructed via stepwise selection found that bone lesions at diagnosis (Odds Ratio (OR): 2.5 [1.2-5.1]), antiplatelet drug use (OR: 3.7 [1.2-11.3]) and ESA use (OR: 4.7 [2.2-9.9]) were associated with increased risk of VTE in our patient population. Use of an Angiotensin Converting Enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (OR: 0.4 [0.2-0.9]) was associated with a decreased risk of VTE. Increased odds of VTE with ESA usage (OR: 5.9 [1.9 - 18.8]) were also noted in the matched case-control analysis. There was no association found between rate of stroke and ESA usage in either logistic or matched case-control analysis. No significant association between ESA use and overall survival was noted in either logistic or matched case-control analysis. When comparing outcomes based upon pre and post FDA revised product labeling, we found a 50% reduction in ESA usage within our institution. In this same time period, the percentage of patients with multiple myeloma developing VTEs has been significantly reduced (18.6% vs 12.8% [p<0.007]). Conclusions: In our population, the use of ESAs in multiple myeloma patients was associated with increased risk of VTE. No significant association between ESA use and overall survival was noted. The observed decrease in both ESA use and rate of VTE in patients with myeloma after the 2007 revised safety labelling by the FDA may reflect practice changes in response to this revision at our institution. Further study in a prospective large multicenter dataset with further control of confounding variables is warranted. Table 1 Table 1. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2011 ◽  
Vol 70 (6) ◽  
pp. 956-960 ◽  
Author(s):  
W G Dixon ◽  
A Kezouh ◽  
S Bernatsky ◽  
S Suissa

BackgroundGlucocorticoid therapy is strongly associated with an elevated risk of serious infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The association between glucocorticoids and common non-serious infections (NSI) is not well studied.MethodsA cohort of 16 207 patients with RA aged over 65 years was assembled using administrative data from Quebec. Glucocorticoid and disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy were identified from drug dispensing records. NSI cases were defined as first occurrence of a community physician billing code for infection or community-dispensed anti-infectives. A nested case–control analysis was performed considering drugs dispensed within 45 days of the index date, adjusting for age, sex, markers of disease severity, DMARD and comorbidity.ResultsFor 13 634 subjects, a NSI occurred during 28 695 person-years of follow-up, generating an incidence rate of 47.5/100 person-years. The crude rate of NSI in glucocorticoid-exposed and unexposed person time was 52.4 and 38.8/100 person-years, respectively. Glucocorticoid therapy was associated with an adjusted RR of 1.20 (95% CI 1.15 to 1.25). A dose response was seen, the adjusted RR increasing from 1.10 (<5 mg prednisolone/day) to 1.85 for doses greater than 20 mg/day. All glucocorticoid risk estimates (including <5 mg/day) were higher than that seen for methotrexate (adjusted RR 1.00; 0.95 to 1.04).ConclusionGlucocorticoid therapy is associated with an increased risk of NSI. The magnitude of risk increases with dose, and is higher than that seen with methotrexate, although residual confounding may exist. While the RR is low at 1.20, the absolute risk is high with one additional infection seen for every 13 patients treated with glucocorticoids for 1 year.


Maturitas ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 132 ◽  
pp. 17-23
Author(s):  
Theresa Burkard ◽  
Marlene Rauch ◽  
Julia Spoendlin ◽  
Daniel Prieto-Alhambra ◽  
Susan S. Jick ◽  
...  

Lupus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-181
Author(s):  
M Morishita ◽  
K-E Sada ◽  
K Ohashi ◽  
Y Miyawaki ◽  
Y Asano ◽  
...  

Objective The objective of this study was to evaluate the chronic damage associated with pregnancies before and after the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods Using childbearing-aged female SLE patient data registered at the Okayama and Showa University Hospitals, a nested case-control analysis was performed to investigate the relationship between pregnancy and chronic damage using the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index (SDI). Results Pregnancy occurred in 22 patients before and 13 patients after the diagnosis of SLE in 104 eligible patients. Live births occurred in 82% (33/40) and 50% (9/18) of the pregnancies before and after the diagnosis of SLE, respectively. After matching age and disease duration, 33 case patients with chronic damage (SDI ≥ 1) and 33 control patients without chronic damage (SDI = 0) were selected. Hypertension was more frequent in cases than in controls (48% vs. 24%, p = 0.041). Pregnancies before and after the diagnosis of SLE were comparable between cases and controls (before the diagnosis: nine case patients and eight control patients; after the diagnosis: three case patients and five control patients; p = 1.00). Even after adjusting for hypertension using multivariate analysis, the pregnancies before and after the diagnosis were not significant predictors for chronic damage (odds ratio = 1.48 (95% confidence interval 0.33–6.65)), p = 0.60 of the pregnancy before the diagnosis; odds ratio = 0.78 (95% confidence interval 0.13–4.74), p = 0.78 of the pregnancy after the diagnosis). Conclusion Pregnancies, either before or after the diagnosis of SLE, did not show any differences in chronic damage. Our results help alleviate fears regarding childbearing in female patients with SLE and their families.


2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron F Bochner ◽  
Jared M Baeten ◽  
W Evan Secor ◽  
Govert J Dam ◽  
Adam A Szpiro ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document