The Efficacy and Safety of Immunomodulatory Drugs in Multiple Myeloma Maintenance Therapy: Results of a Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3477-3477
Author(s):  
Yucai Wang ◽  
Fang Yang ◽  
Wenwen Zhang ◽  
Xiaoxiang Guan ◽  
Neil Kothari ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) in maintenance therapy of multiple myeloma through meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Patients and methods: PubMed, Web of Science, ASCO, ESMO and ASH databases were searched for RCTs that investigated the treatment outcomes (overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS] and/or event-free survival [EFS] and/or time to progression [TTP]) of maintenance therapy with IMiDs in patients with multiple myeloma. Study endpoints included OS, PFS/EFS/TTP, and grade 3 or 4 adverse events. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for survival outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using Comprehensive MetaAnalysis (v2). The random-effect model was utilized in view of clinical heterogeneity in the study population. Results: Eighteen RCTs comprising a total of 6562 patients were included in this meta-analysis. IMiDs used in the RCTs included thalidomide (14 trials) and lenalidomide (4 trials). Overall, IMiD-based maintenance therapy significantly improved OS (HR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.84 - 0.99, P = 0.027) and PFS (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.60 - 0.68, P < 0.001). Notably, IMiDs maintenance therapy increased OS in the setting of ASCT but showed no OS prolongation without ASCT. On further stratification, thalidomide-based maintenance therapy demonstrated OS benefit only in the setting of ASCT, while lenalidomide-based maintenance therapy did not show OS benefit regardless of transplantation status. For PFS however, both thalidomide- and lenalidomide-based maintenance therapies demonstrated significant survival benefits, regardless of transplantation status (Table 1). IMiD-based maintenance therapy increased the risk of developing grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (RR = 3.04, 95% CI = 2.49 - 3.70, P < 0.001), thrombocytopenia (RR = 2.68, 95% CI = 1.90 - 3.79, P < 0.001), anemia (RR = 1.97, 95% CI = 1.23 - 3.15, P = 0.005), infection (RR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.22 - 1.92, P < 0.001), fatigue (HR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.24 - 2.36, P = 0.001), constipation (RR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.15 - 3.62, P = 0.015), and peripheral neuropathy (RR = 2.02, 95% CI = 1.20 - 3.39, P = 0.008). Conclusions: IMiD-based maintenance therapy results in significant improvement in OS and PFS in multiple myeloma patients but increased the risk of developing some grade 3 or 4 adverse events. While thalidomide-containing maintenance therapy regimens showed OS benefits in the setting of ASCT, lenalidomide-containing maintenance therapy did not prolong OS regardless of transplantation status. Both thalidomide- and lenalidomide-based maintenance therapies increased PFS in multiple myeloma patients independent of transplantation status. When more data on lenalidomide and the newer agent pomalidomide become available, further analysis will be warranted to analyze the efficacy and safety of IMiDs in multiple myeloma maintenance therapy. Table 1. Effects of IMiD-based maintenance therapy on OS and PFS in multiple myeloma patients IMiD ASCT status Survival Number of trials HR 95% CI P value Thalidomide/Lenalidomide combined OS 18 0.91 0.84 - 0.99 0.027 with ASCT OS 10 0.88 0.78 - 0.99 0.036 without ASCT OS 9 0.94 0.83 - 1.06 0.299 Thalidomide combined OS 14 0.92 0.84 - 1.01 0.090 with ASCT OS 8 0.87 0.77 - 1.00 0.049 without ASCT OS 7 0.97 0.85 - 1.10 0.640 Lenalidomide combined OS 4 0.84 0.67 - 1.04 0.102 with ASCT OS 2 0.89 0.66 - 1.20 0.457 without ASCT OS 2 0.78 0.57 - 1.06 0.114 Thalidomide/Lenalidomide combined PFS 17 0.63 0.60 -0.68 < 0.001 with ASCT PFS 9 0.62 0.57 - 0.67 < 0.001 without ASCT PFS 9 0.66 0.60 - 0.73 < 0.001 Thalidomide combined PFS 13 0.67 0.63 - 0.72 < 0.001 with ASCT PFS 7 0.66 0.60 - 0.72 < 0.001 without ASCT PFS 7 0.69 0.62 -0.77 < 0.001 Lenalidomide combined PFS 4 0.50 0.43 - 0.58 < 0.001 with ASCT PFS 2 0.49 0.41 - 0.58 < 0.001 without ASCT PFS 2 0.52 0.40 - 0.67 < 0.001 Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3473-3473
Author(s):  
Yucai Wang ◽  
Wenwen Zhang ◽  
Fang Yang ◽  
Xiaoxiang Guan ◽  
Neil Kothari ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bortezomib-containing regimens in maintenance therapy of multiple myeloma through meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Patients and methods: PubMed, Web of Science and ASH databases were searched for RCTs that investigated the treatment outcomes (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]) of maintenance therapy with bortezomib-containing regimens in patients with multiple myeloma. Study endpoints included PFS, OS, and grade 3 or 4 adverse events. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for survival outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using Comprehensive MetaAnalysis (v2). Results: Three RCTs comprising 1396 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with maintenance therapy without bortezomib and/or no maintenance therapy, bortezomib-based maintenance therapy regimens significantly prolonged PFS (HR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.58 - 0.76, P < 0.001) and OS (HR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.62 - 0.88, P = 0.001) in multiple myeloma patients. In patients who received high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), bortezomib-based maintenance therapy increased both PFS (HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.61 - 0.86, P < 0.001) and OS (HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.61 - 0.95, P = 0.016). For transplant ineligible patients, maintenance therapy with bortezomib-containing regimen also increased PFS (HR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.47 - 0.71, P < 0.001) and OS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.52 - 0.92, P = 0.012). However, bortezomib-based maintenance therapy increased the risks of grade 3 or 4 adverse events including thrombocytopenia (RR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.01 - 1.87, P = 0.046), infections (RR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.02 - 1.64, P = 0.035), cardiac disorders (RR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.17 - 3.47, P = 0.012), and vascular events (RR = 2.02, 95% CI = 1.15 - 1.45, P= 0.015). Conclusions: Bortezomib-based maintenance therapy results in significant improvement in PFS and OS in multiple myeloma patients, but may increase the risk of developing some grade 3 or 4 adverse events, such as thrombocytopenia, infections, cardiac disorders, and vascular events. Further studies are needed to corroborate the above findings given the limited data on proteasome inhibitor based maintenance therapy for multiple myeloma. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shenghao Wu ◽  
Cuiping Zheng ◽  
Songyan Chen ◽  
Xiaoping Cai ◽  
Yuejian Shi ◽  
...  

Objective. To investigate the efficacy and safety of the treatment of the newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients with the therapy of subcutaneous (subQ) administration of bortezomib and dexamethasone plus thalidomide (VTD) regimen.Methods. A total of 60 newly diagnosed MM patients were analyzed. 30 patients received improved VTD regimen (improved VTD group) with the subQ injection of bortezomib and the other 30 patients received conventional VTD regimen (VTD group).The efficacy and safety of two groups were analyzed retrospectively.Results. The overall remission (OR) after eight cycles of treatment was 73.3% in the VTD group and 76.7% in the improved VTD group (P>0.05). No significant differences in time to 1-year estimate of overall survival (72% versus 75%,P=0.848) and progression-free survival (median 22 months versus 25 months;P=0.725) between two groups. The main toxicities related to therapy were leukopenia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, asthenia, fatigue, and renal and urinary disorders. Grade 3 and higher adverse events were significantly less common in the improved VTD group (50%) than VTD group (80%,P=0.015).Conclusions. The improved VTD regimen by changing bortezomib from intravenous administration to subcutaneous injection has noninferior efficacy to standard VTD regimen, with an improved safety profile and reduced adverse events.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 2022-2022
Author(s):  
Adeela Mushtaq ◽  
Ahmad Iftikhar ◽  
Midhat Lakhani ◽  
Fnu Sagar ◽  
Ahmad Kamal ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Bortezomib, a proteasome inhibitor and lenalidomide (Len), an immunomodulatory drug are the backbone of established treatment regimens for newly diagnosed MM. Patients with dual-refractory (refractory to both bortezomib and lenalidomide) disease have a poor prognosis with overall survival estimated to be less than one year. Pomalidomide (Pom) has distinct anticancer, antiangiogenic and immunomodulatory properties and has demonstrated synergistic antiproliferative activity in combination regimens. The aim of our study is to compare different Pom based regimens to identify the most effective regimen for relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients. Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed on PubMed, Cochrane library, Web of Science, Embase and AdisInsight databases on 03/29/2018 which identified a total of 1374 studies. We included phase II/III clinical trials on pomalidomide based regimens that have clearly documented efficacy outcomes. All statistical analyses were performed using Comprehensive Meta-analysis (CMA) Version 3. We used the Cochrane Q statistics (p<0.05 considered significant) and I2 index to calculate the degree of heterogeneity of the studies. A random effect model was used if there was significant heterogeneity (p>0.05 or I2 >50%). Studies were classified into subgroups according to the therapeutic regimen: dual and triplet combinations. A separate stratified analysis of triplet regimens based on type of regimen was also performed. Results A total of 35 studies (n = 4623 patients) were included. The most commonly studied regimen was Pom + LoDex (Low dose dexamethasone) with a total of 16 studies on this regimen. All patients included in our study had ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy. Mean number of prior lines of therapy was 6. Most patients were lenalidomide refractory, with 10 patient cohorts of 100% refractoriness and 8 cohorts of ≥ 90% refractoriness. Pooled analysis showed an overall response rate (ORR) of 47.1% across all Pom regimens including both doublet and triplet regimens. An I2 value of 87.3 was found, indicating high heterogeneity across all Pom regimens. With Pom-LoDex, pooled ORR was found to be 35.7% and mean OS 14.37 months. With triplet regimens, pooled ORR was found to be 61.9%. In a separate stratified analysis of triplet regimens based on type of regimen, pooled ORRs with few selected regimens were as follows; Bort-Pom-LoDex (pooled ORR 83.5%, mean PFS 15.7 months [mos]), CFZ-Pom-LoDex (pooled ORR 77.1%, mean PFS 15.3 mos), Pom-LoDex-bendamustine (pooled ORR 74.2%), Pom-Dex-daratumumab (pooled ORR 64.5%), Pom-LoDex-cyclophosphamide (pooled ORR 59.4%, mean PFS 9.5 mos), Pom-LoDex-doxorubicin (pooled ORR 32%). Most frequently reported adverse event with Pom based regimens was myelosuppression. Mean incidences of grade ≥3 hematologic adverse events were neutropenia (47.6%), anemia (26.5%), and thrombocytopenia (20.8%). Mean incidences of grade ≥3 non-hematologic adverse events were infections (29.1%), pneumonia (13.8%) and fatigue (10%). Most of the studies used pomalidomide 4mg daily dosing. Lacy et al. suggested no advantage of 4mg pomalidomide over 2 mg daily dosing. Conclusion From results of pooled analysis, we can infer that triplet combinations of Pom yield almost double response rates (pooled ORR 61.9%) when compared to dual combination of Pom-LoDex (pooled ORR 35.7%). Among three drug combinations, Bort-Pom-LoDex (pooled ORR 83.5%) and CFZ-Pom-LoDex (pooled ORR 77.1%) seem to produce better outcomes. Our study provides useful insight into relative efficacy of various Pom regimens for treatment of RRMM patients. Several trials involving various MoAbs like nivolumab, daratumumab, elotuzumab, isatuximab and pembrolizumab in combination with Pom-LoDex are currently ongoing. Pomalidomide has an acceptable safety profile. Most common treatment emergent adverse events were myelotoxicity and infections that can be effectively managed with supportive care and dose modifications. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3292-3292
Author(s):  
Muhammad Abu Zar ◽  
Ahmad Kamal ◽  
Ali Younas Khan ◽  
Saad Ullah Malik ◽  
Mustafa Nadeem Malik ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Daratumumab is a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody targeting CD38 that has been approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). We performed a meta-analysis of trials with daratumumab to find its efficacy and safety. Materials and Methods: Extensive literature search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov on 5/07/2018 identified a total of 1596 articles. Fourteen articles (n = 1439) met the inclusion criteria, eleven in the relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and three in the newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) group (Table 1). A meta-analysis was performed using STATA version 15 and inter study heterogeneity was calculated using I² statistic. Results: The overall response rate (ORR) was 69% (95% CI: 51-84%) and very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) was 40% (95% CI: 22-60%) in RRMM patients. In a subgroup analysis with three, two and single drug regimen, ORR was 85% (95% CI: 77-92%), 30% (95% CI: 21-40%) and 31% (95% CI: 24-39%) respectively in RRMM patients. The hazard ratio (HR) for progression free survival (PFS) with daratumumab based regimens was 0.35 (95% CI: 0.26-0.45) as compared to non-daratumumab based regimens in two randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The most effective regimen, in terms of PFS for RRMM patients with a median of a single previous line of therapy was daratumumab with lenalidomide with dexamethasone (24-months PFS rate: 68%) in the POLLUX trial (Dimopoulos et al., 2017). The ORR was 97% (95% CI: 92-100%) and ≥VGPR rate was 64% (95% CI: 44-83%) in NDMM patients (Figure 1). In the only available RCT for NDMM patients, the HR for PFS was 0.50 (95% CI: 0.38-0.65) (Mateos et al., 2017). Incidence of neutropenia was 30% (95% CI: 16-46%) and thrombocytopenia was 25% (95% CI: 15-37%). While the incidence of anemia was 17% (95% CI: 13-21%). Incidence of ≥ grade 3 non-hematologic treatment emergent adverse effects (TEAEs) were as follows: pneumonia (11.3-12%), hypertension (8-12%) and fatigue (4-12.5%). In daratumumab and non-daratumumab based regimens ≥ grade 3 infusions related reactions occurred in 5% of the patients. In the three RCTs, these hematologic (≥ grade 3) TEAEs were comparable as neutropenia occurred in 36.86% vs 29.57%, thrombocytopenia in 30% vs 29% and anemia in 16.67% vs 19% respectively. Patients on daratumumab based regimens who discontinued treatment due to TEAEs were 8.56% vs 9.93% on non-daratumumab based regimens in the three RCTs which shows that most of the treatment discontinuations was due to other drugs in the regimen. Conclusion: Our results suggest that daratumumab containing regimen is more effective than non-daratumumab based regimens for RRMM and NDMM patients. Three drug daratumumab based regimens are more effective when compared to two drug or daratumumab monotherapy regimens. The safety profile of daratumumab is favorable, which makes it an extremely useful drug. Despite limited data in NDMM patients, daratumumab based regimens appear to be highly effective. Further prospective randomized trials are needed to compare various daratumumab based regimens. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 5639-5639
Author(s):  
Madeeha Shafqat ◽  
Faiza Jamil ◽  
Zunairah Shah ◽  
Ali Younas Khan ◽  
Seren Durer ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Ixazomib (Ixa) is the first FDA approved oral proteasome inhibitor to be used for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). We conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of all published prospective clinical trials to analyze the efficacy and safety of ixazomib in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) and relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Method: After review of literature (last updated June 30, 2018) using database searches (Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Clinical Trials.gov), from a total of 1290 studies, only fifteen clinical trials (n=1387) met the inclusion criteria for RRMM and eight clinical trials (n=537) met criteria for NDMM. CMA software v.3 was used for meta-analysis. Heterogeneity among studies was assessed using the I2 test. A random-effect model was applied. Result: Based on pooled analysis, an overall response rate (ORR) of 40.6% (95% CI:19.4-66.0) with a very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) of 15.7% (95% CI: 6.8-32.1) in RRMM and ORR (CR+VGPR+PR) of 77.5% (95% CI: 73.1-81.4, I2=48.05) in NDMM was observed. Most common grade (G) ≥ 3 adverse events (AE) based on regimen were calculated using pooled analysis in MM patients. Ixazomib Based Regimen in RRMM: Ixazomib as monotherapy: Four studies (n=192) evaluated the efficacy of ixazomib as a single agent. On subgroup pooled analysis on Ixa as monotherapy, an ORR of 22.7% (95% CI: 13.3-35.9, I2=45%) was observed with ≥VGPR of 7.8% (95% CI: 2.7-20.3). Pooled analysis for safety profile on most common G ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) were thrombocytopenia 32.3% (95% CI: 22.4-44.2), neutropenia 21.5% (95% CI: 12.6-34.1), diarrhea 13.1% (95% CI: 6.8-23.9), fatigue 11.6% (95% CI: 7.4-17.7) and peripheral neuropathy 2.2% (95% CI: 0.7-6.6). Ixazomib in two drug regimen: In RRMM, two clinical trials (n=92) evaluated the efficacy of Ixa weekly with dexamethasone (D). In this subgroup pooled analysis, ORR of 40.7% (95% CI: 22.8-61.5, I2=41.76%) with ≥VGPR of 19.5% (95% CI: 4.6-52) was calculated. One study reported event-free survival (EFS) of 8.4 months(4.5-12.8) with a 1-year overall survival rate of 96% (95% CI: 91-100). In our analysis for safety (n=102), common G≥ 3 AEs calculated was thrombocytopenia in 20% (95% CI: 7.5-43.7), neutropenia in 14.3% (95% CI: 3.7-41.6), fatigue in 9.1% (95% CI: 5.0-16.2), diarrhea in 5.7% (1.1-25.5), nausea in 5.7% (95% CI: 1.4-20.2) and peripheral neuropathy in 5.7% (95% CI: 1.4-20.2). Ixazomib in three drug regimen: In RRMM, the efficacy of Ixa was evaluated inten clinical trials (n=646), an ORR of 56.3% (95% CI: 41.8-65.5, I2=82%) with ≥VGPR of 22.8% (95% CI: 13.2-36.4) was noted. Best response was seen when Ixa was used in combination with lenalidomide (R) and dexamethasone, with reported ORR of 78.3%. Common AEs were neutropenia 23.5% (95% CI: 16-33.1), thrombocytopenia 18.8% (95% CI: 13.4-25.6) anemia 10.5% (95% CI: 8.2-13.2), diarrhea 6.3% (95% CI: 3.4 -11.3), fatigue 4.2% (95% CI:2.7-6.4), nausea 1.8% (95% CI: 0.9-3.5) and peripheral neuropathy 2.3% (95% CI: 1.3-3.9). Ixazomib Based Regimen In NDMM: Pooled analysis of subgroup study for combination regimen of Ixa as IRD, Ixa-Thalidomide (T)-D, Ixa-Cyclophosphamide (C)-D, and with Ixa -melphalan-prednisone (IMP), their estimated ORR was 83.7% (95% CI: 75.6-89.5), 80.8% (95% CI: 72.8-86.9), 75% (95% CI: 66.6-82) and 66% (95% CI: 52.4-77.4) respectively. We also measured the efficacy of Ixa as a maintenance therapy, estimated ORR was 81.5% (95% CI: 36.6-97.1, I2=90.5%). In one phase II maintenance study (n=64), a combination of IR receiving patients (n=34), an ORR of 90.4% with VGPR of 53% was reported. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached after a median follow up of 37.8 months and estimated 2-year PFS was 81%. Common G≥3 AEs in NDMM patients were neutropenia 21.6% (95% CI: 11.2-37.6), thrombocytopenia 15.9% (95% CI: 4.7- 42), infections 15.2% (95% CI: 10.3-21.9) and peripheral neuropathy 7.9% (95% CI: 4.7-13). Conclusion: In our pooled analysis (95%CI), Ixazomib has shown promising efficacy both in NDMM as well as RRMM. Especially in three drug regimen it showed an estimated ORR of 84.8% in NDMM and 56.3% RRMM.Cytopenia was a common side effect.Peripheral neuropathy was noted to be a rare side-effect (2.6%) in RRMM. Further studies are required to evaluate efficacy and safety of ixazomib in combination therapies in NDMM. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (8) ◽  
pp. 030006052110381
Author(s):  
Yin Wang ◽  
Yanqing Li ◽  
Ye Chai

Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination regimens containing daratumumab in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Methods A systematic search of publications listed on electronic databases (PubMed®, The Cochrane Library, Science Direct and Web of Science) between inception and 13 November 2020 was conducted to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included patients with MM that were treated with combination regimens containing daratumumab. Results A total of seven RCTs were included ( n = 4268 patients). Meta-analysis showed that compared with the control group, the group containing daratumumab showed a significantly better overall response rate and a complete response or better. Daratumumab improved efficacy in both standard-risk and cytogenetically high-risk patients with MM. The prevalence of neutropenia (≥grade 3) and pneumonia was significantly higher in the daratumumab group compared with the control group. Conclusion The available evidence demonstrated that the clinical application of combination regimens containing daratumumab improved the efficacy in patients with MM and had acceptable safety.


Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 2663
Author(s):  
Tung Hoang ◽  
Jeongseon Kim

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of systemic therapies in the treatment of unresectable advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer. Predicted hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% credible intervals (CrIs) for overall survival (OS) were calculated from the odds ratio (OR) for the overall response rate and/or HR for progression-free survival using multivariate random effects (MVRE) models. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) of 49 articles to compare the efficacy and safety of FOLFOX/FOLFIRI±bevacizumab (Bmab)/cetuximab (Cmab)/panitumumab (Pmab), and FOLFOXIRI/CAPEOX±Bmab. The NMA showed significant OS improvement with FOLFOX, FOLFOX+Cmab, and FOLFIRI+Cmab compared with that of FOLFIRI (HR = 0.84, 95% CrI = 0.73–0.98; HR = 0.76, 95% CrI = 0.62–0.94; HR = 0.80, 95% CrI = 0.66–0.96, respectively), as well as with FOLFOX+Cmab and FOLFIRI+Cmab compared with that of FOLFOXIRI (HR = 0.69, 95% CrI = 0.51–0.94 and HR = 0.73, 95% CrI = 0.54–0.97, respectively). The odds of adverse events grade ≥3 were significantly higher for FOLFOX+Cmab vs. FOLFIRI+Bmab (OR = 2.34, 95% CrI = 1.01–4.66). Higher odds of events were observed for FOLFIRI+Pmab in comparison with FOLFIRI (OR = 2.16, 95% CrI = 1.09–3.84) and FOLFIRI+Bmab (OR = 3.14, 95% CrI = 1.51–5.89). FOLFOX+Cmab and FOLFIRI+Bmab showed high probabilities of being first- and second-line treatments in terms of the efficacy and safety, respectively. The findings of the efficacy and safety comparisons may support the selection of appropriate treatments in clinical practice. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020153640.


Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 5179-5179
Author(s):  
Zhi-Xiang Shen ◽  
Hua Yan ◽  
Linna Wang

Abstract Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma-cell malignancy and overall survival for patients who have relapsed after initial therapy is approximately 2 years. Bortezomib (VELCADE TM) is a first-in-class proteasome inhibitor that has demonstrated significant anti-tumor activity in MM patients. Here we report the results of an observational study of the efficacy and safety of bortezomib-based regimens in Chinese relapsed/refractory MM patients. Methods: This was a multi-center, open-label, phase IV observational study designed to enroll 550 patients with relapsed or refractory MM. From Mar 2006 to May 2008, 500 patients with relapsed or refractory MM were enrolled from 43 medical centers in China and 395 of them were evaluated. Bortezomib (0.7 to 1.6 mg/m2 i.v.) was given on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 in in a 21-day cycle, up to a maximum of 8 cycles, combined with other agents, mainly with the addition of dexamethasone (60.1%). Major endpoint included response rate, safety and time to response. Responses of 62% patients were determined by European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria (EBMT). Bortezomib withheld if patients developed neutropenia fever, grade 4 haematologic adverse events (AEs), or grade 3 non-haematologic AEs, and re-administered at 75% of the initial dosage after recovery. Results: In 395 evaluable cases, the median age was 59 years (range 35–82) and the male/female ratio was 1.5:1. 90% of patients were in late stage(stage II/III) and 50% of them were IgG subtype. Patients had received various prior therapies before bortezomib treatment, including VAD (31.3%), VBMCP (M2, 15.1%) and thalidomide-based regimens(14.9%), with best response rate of 10.4% complete response (CR) and 42.3% partial response (PR) from prior therapies. 311 (82%) cases of patients received 1.0–1.4mg/m2 bortezomib-based regimens treatment and 38.5% of them received at least 4 cycles of treatment. 364 patients were evaluable for response, the overall response rate was 287/364 (78.8%), 89 patients (24.5%) achieved a CR, 30(8.24%) had a nearly complete response (nCR), 168 (46.2%) had a PR, 39 (10.7%) had minimal response (MR), 24 (6.6%) had stable disease (SD), and the other 14 (3.9%) had progressive disease (PD). Median time to response was 1 cycle of treatment (range 1–6). Patients who received 4 or more cycles of bortezomib treatment achieved a higher response rate (CR+PR: 81.5%) compared to those who received fewer cycles (partly due to adverse events). And prognosis-related analysis showed that the dosage of bortezomib at 1.0 mg/m2 or more had a significant influence on the time to response and response rate, but no obvious effect on response duration, time to progress or the survival time. Drug related adverse events (AEs) were reported in 50.4% of patients during treatment, including hematologic AEs (mainly thrombocytopenia, 22.5%), gastrointestinal AEs (24.8%), and peripheral neuropathy (22.5%). The rates of grade 3–4 AEs of them were 46.1%, 11.2% and 15.7%, respectively. Serious AEs occurred in 33 (8.4%) cases and 23 (70%) patients recovered finally. Most AEs were predictable and manageable. Conclusion: Bortezomib-based regimen is effective treatment with higher response rate and is well tolerated in most Chinese patients with relapsed and refractory MM patients. Long-term follow-up is continuing.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 1866-1866
Author(s):  
Min Kyoung Kim ◽  
Chang-Ki Min ◽  
Myung Soo Hyun ◽  
Kihyun Kim ◽  
Sung-Soo Yoon ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 1866 Background: In multiple myeloma (MM), the association between the response to induction before autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and long-term outcome is less clear but the situation may change with the introduction of novel agents. We therefore assessed the clinical relevance of response of bortezomib induction treatment or post-ASCT response for patients who received bortezomib-combined induction chemotherapy followed by ASCT. Methods: We retrospectively assessed 183 MM patients who received bortezomib-containing induction therapy (BTZ-IT) followed by ASCT in 24 institutions throughout Korea between 2003 and 2010. Records of these patients were reviewed using the Korean Myeloma Registry database (www.myeloma.or.kr). Each institution was requested to reconfirm the data using additional case report forms. Patients who had overt MM based on International Myeloma Working Group diagnostic criteria were selected. Results: One-hundred seventy eight patients were eligible. Their median age was 56 years (range, 28–69 years) and 96 (53.9%) were male. Forty nine (27.5%) received bortezomib as front-line therapy and 129 (72.5%) as second-line treatment. All patients underwent ASCT and 22 (12.4%) were treated with tandem ASCT. Ninety-seven (54.5%) patients were treated with maintenance therapy after ASCT. After BTZ-IT, the response rates in this selected series of patients were 37.6% CR, 12.4% VGPR, 41.0% PR, 7.3% SD and 1.7% PD (Figure 1A, 1B, 1C); the corresponding post-ASCT rates were 69.2% CR, 14.0% VGPR, 11.0% PR, 2.9% SD and 2.9% PD. At a median follow-up of 46.6 months, the 3-year overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) rates were 70.0% and 31.9%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that factors independently predictive of OS and EFS included achievement of BTZ-IT response °Ã PR (P=0.025 and P=0.014, respectively) and the treatment with maintenance therapy (P=0.048 and P=0.001, respectively). Post-ASCT CR vs. °Â VGPR was also an independent prognostic factor for OS and EFS (P=0.0001 and P=0.002, respectively). Conclusion: At least PR to BTZ-IT and CR after ASCT were predictive of survival. These findings suggest that patients who responded to BTZ-IT may benefit from ASCT due to an enhanced quality of response. Maintenance therapy can also affect patient outcomes. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 287-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inger S. Nijhof ◽  
Sonja Zweegman ◽  
Mark-David Levin ◽  
Harry R. Koene ◽  
Aart Beeker ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The outcome of multiple myeloma (MM) patients who are no longer responding to thalidomide, lenalidomide (LEN) and bortezomib (BORT) is very poor, with a median event-free survival of 5 months and median overall survival (OS) of 9 months (Kumar SK et al, Leukemia 2012; 26;149-157). We have previously shown in a small retrospective study that the combination of continuous low dose oral cyclophosphamide (endoxan) and prednisone combined with lenalidomide (REP) had remarkable activity in heavily pretreated LEN-refractory multiple myeloma patients (median 6 lines of previous chemotherapy) (vd Donk et al; Br J Haematol 2010;148(2):335-7). To determine the optimal dose of lenalidomide with continuous cyclophosphamide and prednisone, we initiated a prospective study to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the REP regimen and to assess its efficacy and safety in LEN-refractory MM patients. Here we report safety and efficacy data from the phase 1 dose-escalation part of the REPEAT-study (NCT01352338). Patients and Methods Patients aged ≥ 18 years with LEN-refractory MM, ECOG-performance status 0-3 and adequate kidney, liver and hematologic function were included. Five dose levels were evaluated using a standard 3+3 design, based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurring in cycle 1. Patients received LEN in doses ranging from 10-25 mg/day on days 1-21 of 28-day cycle, while oral cyclophosphamide (50 or 100 mg) and prednisone (20 mg) were given continuously. Therapy was continued until progression. The MTD for the phase 2 part is defined as the highest dose level with 0 or 1 DLT's observed in 6 patients. Results Up till now, 35 patients were enrolled (22 in phase 1 and 13 in phase 2) from August 2011 to June 2013. The phase 2 part is still recruiting and data are not evaluable yet. One patient in phase 1 was excluded because of study violation and is not included in the analysis. The median age of the 21 evaluable patients in phase 1 was 69 years (range 41-73); 76% were male. The median duration of the disease from diagnosis was 41 months (range 18-96), median number of prior therapies was 3 (range 2-6), and 12 patients (57%) had previously received autologous SCT. All patients were LEN-refractory, 19 (90%) had prior BORT treatment, and 16 (76%) had BORT-refractory MM. Fifty-five % of the patients were considered high risk by FISH. At the time of analysis, 16 of 21 patients in phase 1 have discontinued treatment because of disease progression (13), alternative treatment (allo-SCT) (1), or adverse events (2). The MTD was defined as LEN 25 mg days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle, combined with oral cyclophosphamide 50 mg and prednisone 20 mg continuously (dose level 4), based on three patients experiencing a DLT: two developed pneumonia (in dose levels 4 and 5; CTC grade 3), and one patient at dose level 5 experienced CTC grade 3 dyspnea. Neutropenia (18%) and thrombocytopenia (18%) were the most common grade 3 hematological adverse events (AEs), which were managed with growth factor support and/or dose modification. There were no grade 4 hematologic AEs. Grade 3 respiratory tract infections (29%) and grade 2 fatigue (19%) were the most common non-hematological AEs. Venous thromboembolism occurred in 1 patient. Figure 1 shows a waterfall plot of the responses of the patients that participated in the phase 1 part of the study. Overall response rate (≥ PR) was 67% with 6 out of 21 (29%) patients achieving at least VGPR. In addition 2 patients achieved MR (≥ MR: 76%). Median PFS and OS were 6.3 and 15.5 months respectively. Similar results were achieved in the subset of patients with LEN- and BORT-refractory disease. Interestingly, laboratory experiments with purified myeloma cells from these patients suggest synergism between LEN and cyclophosphamide. Conclusions The REP regimen induces high response rates and prolonged PFS and OS in LEN-refractory patients with acceptable toxicity. The MTD is defined as LEN 25 mg days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle, combined with oral cyclophosphamide 50 mg and prednisone 20 mg continuously. Phase 2 is enrolling patients and evaluates efficacy and safety of the REP regimen at the MTD. REP should be considered a valuable salvage option for LEN-refractory MM patients. We will present an updated follow-up at ASH. Disclosures: Sonneveld: Onyx: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Research Funding; Onyx: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding. Lokhorst:Genmab A/S: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Johnson-Cilag: Honoraria; Mudipharma: Honoraria. van de Donk:Celgene: Research Funding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document