The Relationship of Response on Time to Next Treatment Based on Evidence from Two RCTs in Newly Diagnosed Stem Cell Transplantation Ineligible Multiple Myeloma Patients

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2141-2141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chrissy H. Y. Van Beurden-Tan ◽  
Hedwig Blommestein ◽  
Sonja Zweegman ◽  
Pieter Sonneveld
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Category ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Optimal Sequence ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract INTRODUCTION The outcome of patients with Multiple Myeloma (MM) improved considerably over the last years due to an increase in availability of novel agents. However, the optimal sequence is largely unknown. Besides efficacy, determination of the optimal sequence is also of importance in light of cost effectiveness. To this end the development of a health economic (HE) model would be of interest. For such a model time to next treatment (TTNT) is required. We previously showed that in stem cell transplant (SCT) eligible patients TTNT was not treatment but response (i.e. complete, partial or no response; CR, PR or NR) dependent. We here investigate whether response was predictive for TTNT independent of the treatment regimen in SCT ineligible patients (pts) with MM. METHODS We analyzed patient level data of two phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed by the Dutch-Belgian cooperative HOVON group in newly diagnosed, transplant-ineligible patients. The HOVON-87 (N=668) compared Melphalan Prednisone (MP) with Thalidomide followed by Thalidomide maintenance (MPT-T) versus MP with Lenalidomide followed by Lenalidomide maintenance (MPR-R) (Zweegman et al Blood 2016) (EudraCT number 2007-004007-34). The HOVON-49 (N=333) compared MP versus MPT (including Thalidomide maintenance) (Wijermans et al J Clin Oncol 2010) (ISRCTN 90692740). The following data were included: treatment, best response, TTNT and survival status. Pts were censored after last date of contact. Pts who did not have information on TTNT and/or response were excluded from our analyses. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models were fitted on this data to investigate whether the TTNT is mainly response dependent and whether the quality of response is predictive for TTNT. RESULTS We included 519 HOVON-87 pts and 252 HOVON-49 pts. First, we analyzed the TTNT hazard ratios (HRs) of the active and comparative arm within each response category for both trials. The TTNT HR of the HOVON-87 pts with a CR (N=75) was not significantly different between treatments (HR 1.340, 95% CI: 0.590-3.039, p-val = 0.484). We also found no significant difference in PR pts (HR 0.952, 95% CI: 0.753-1.204, p-val = 0.681, N = 375) and NR pts (HR: 0.898, 95% CI: 0.518-1.556, p-val = 0.701, N=69). The number of CR pts in the HOVON-49 study was too low (N=8) to allow for a reliable analysis of this response category. Therefore, for this study we present very good PR (VGPR) as separate category. For both VGPR (N=44 pts) and PR pts (N=95 pts) we did see a significant difference in TTNT in the treatment arms (HR: 0.363, 95% CI: 0.174-0.757, p-val = 0.007 and HR:0.634, 95% CI: 0.417-0.965, p-val = 0.033 respectively). However, for NR pts the TTNT HR was similar (HR: 1.131, 95% CI: 0.746-1.714, p-val = 0.561, N=105 pts) Second, we compared the TTNT between the different response groups within each trial. For HOVON-87, the median TTNT for CR pts was 63.4 months (mos) (95% CI: 51.8 mos - not evaluable), for PR pts it was 24.6 mos (95% CI: 22.8 - 27.3 mos), and for NR pts it was 19.5 mos (95% CI: 9.7 - 25.3 mos). The TTNT of CR pts was significantly longer than of PR pts (HR: 3.923, 95% CI: 2.601-5.917, p-val = 0.000). And the TTNT of PR pts was significantly longer than of NR pts (HR: 1.411, 95% CI: 1.052-1.893, p-val - 0.000). For HOVON-49, the median TTNT for VGPR pts is 23.4 mos (95% CI: 15.0 - 26.7 mos), PR pts was 19.0 mos (95% CI: 15.4 - 21.5 mos), and for NR pts was 3.7 mos (95% CI: 3.4 - 4.3 mos). Only the TTNT of PR pts was significantly longer than the TTNT of NR pts (HR: 3.978, 95% CI: 2.938 - 5.388). CONCLUSIONS Data from the HOVON-87 showed a relationship between response and TTNT. Pts in this trial achieving a CR were observed to have a significantly longer TTNT compared to those achieving PR at best. Furthermore, TTNT was not significantly different for the treatment arms (e.g. patients with CR after MPR-R had similar TTNT than patients with CR after MPT-T). Establishing a relationship between response and TTNT was challenging among pts from the HOVON-49 since i) too few CR pts were seen in this trial and ii) the experimental arm included maintenance while the comparator treatment did not. We can conclude that the previous established relationship between response and TTNT was partly confirmed for newly diagnosed SCT ineligible MM pts. Further research is necessary to identify other relevant predictors for TTNT and to confirm the current findings before we can incorporate this into our HE model. Disclosures Blommestein: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Research Funding. Zweegman:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. Sonneveld:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Carfilzomib at 56mg/m2 with Cyclophosphamide and Dexamethasone (K56Cd) in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients Followed By ASCT or K56Cd Consolidation: Initial Results of the Phase 2 Cardamon Study

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 861-861 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kwee Yong ◽  
Rakesh Popat ◽  
William Wilson ◽  
Gavin Pang ◽  
Richard Jenner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Standard Risk

Introduction: Carfilzomib (20/36mg/m2) triplets with Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (KRd), or Cyclophosphamide-Dexamethasone (KCd) are safe and effective in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma(NDMM). The higher dose of 56mg/m2 is effective as a doublet with Dexamethasone in the relapsed setting, but there is limited data on this dose in triplet combinations in the frontline setting. Aim: The CARDAMON study evaluated KCd with bi-weekly carfilzomib (56mg/m2) as induction in NDMM patients, and the benefit of ASCT versus K56Cd consolidation followed by carfilzomib maintenance. Co-primary endpoints were major response (≥VGPR rate) to 4 induction cycles of K56Cd, and 2-year PFS for ASCT versus K56Cd consolidation. Here we report interim analysis of the first primary endpoint of ≥VGPR rate to K56Cd induction. Methods: Transplant eligible ND patients received 4 x 28d cycles of K56Cd (carfilzomib:20/56mg/m2, IV d1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, cyclophosphamide 500mg orally d1, 8, 15 and dexamethasone 20mg d1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16). Responding patients with a successful stem cell harvest (PBSCH) were randomised to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) or 4 more cycles of K56Cd as consolidation, followed by 18 months carfilzomib maintenance (K56 days 1, 8, 15) for both arms. Trial recruitment completed in July 2019. Response was assessed by IMWG criteria; all patients had MRD testing by multi-parameter flow cytometry (10-5) after PBSCH. Adverse risk genetics was any one of t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14,20) or del(17p). Results: 281 pts were registered between 06/2015 and 07/2019; we report outcomes for 252 patients who either completed induction or came off study before end of induction. Median age was 58yrs(33-74), 91% ECOG 0-1, 45.2% ISS I, 24.7% adverse risk (48.5% when including 1p/1q+). Best response at end of induction or after PBSCH (n=250) was: ≥VGPR 59.2%, ORR 87.6%. ≥VGPR rate in adverse risk patients was 53.4% vs 61.9% in standard risk(SR), (p=0.25), ORR was similar: adverse risk, 87.9% vs standard risk, 88.1%. Post-PBSCH, 24.1% of patients were MRD-negative (patients who were withdrawn due to insufficient induction response or toxicity and those with an inconclusive result were grouped with the MRD-positive). Of 19 patients in sCR/CR, 9 were MRD-negative(47.4%) while 40/110 (36.4%) of VGPR patients were MRD-negative. MRD-negative rates in adverse and standard risk patients were 22.8% and 24.7% respectively. 10 patients progressed during or at end of induction, and 12 were withdrawn for toxicity. There were 4 deaths during induction, one from myocardial infarction, the other 3 from cardiac arrest, associated with bronchopneumonia and sepsis. During induction, 114 serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in 72/252 patients, notable ones were thrombotic microangiopathy (2), grade 3 cardiac ischaemia (4), infection (16.3%, mainly lung), renal impairment (6), G3 hypertension (3), thromboembolism(2). Specific guidance for hypertension management was incorporated. 25% of patients are currently reported to have received a dose modification during induction. Full details of adverse events and dose intensity will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: K56Cd is an effective induction regimen in NDMM patients, and has equivalent MRD negative rates in adverse and standard risk disease. The SAE profile is in keeping with published safety data with carfilzomib. Disclosures Yong: Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Autolus: Consultancy; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Popat:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: travel support to meetings; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses. Ramasamy:Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: 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; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; NAPP Pharmaceuticals Ltd.: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag Ltd.: Research Funding; Oncopeptides and Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chapman:Takeda: Honoraria. Benjamin:Allogene: Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Servier: Research Funding; Eusapharm: Consultancy. Owen:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/ meeting support. OffLabel Disclosure: Carfilzomib is used with cyclophosphamide as 1st line treatment for myeloma

scholarly journals A Multi-Center Phase 1b, Open-Label, Dose-Finding Pilot Study to Evaluate the Combination of Carfilzomib and Cyclophosphamide with Dexamethasone (CCyD) Prior to Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT) in Patients with Transplant Eligible Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 4739-4739 ◽  
Author(s):  
William I. Bensinger ◽  
Robert Vescio ◽  
Cristina Gasparetto ◽  
Elber S. Camacho ◽  
Rajneesh Nath ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Autologous Stem Cell Transplant ◽  
Dose Finding ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Advisory Committees

Abstract Background: Carfilzomib is an epoxy ketone, second generation proteasome inhibitor approved for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. It has shown very high activity when combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for the treatment of newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma. This is the first reported trial of carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (CCyD) in newly-diagnosed, transplant eligible patients. Methods: This study was a multi-center Phase Ib, open-label, dose-finding study in newly diagnosed transplant eligible multiple myeloma patients (pts) studying the combination of CCyD as induction therapy prior to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Pts could receive a minimum of 4 cycles and up to 6 cycles prior to ASCT. Pts were enrolled into a dose-escalation treatment cohort. A standard 3+3 dose escalation schedule was used with cohorts of carfilzomib 36 (initial), 45 and 56 mg/m2 (administered over 30 minutes on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16) combined with 300 mg/m2 of oral cyclophosphamide weekly on days 1, 8, 15 and 40 mg of oral dexamethasone once weekly. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by NCI-CTCAE v4. Response was assessed by the IMWG criteria. Prior therapy was limited to up to 160 mg of dexamethasone or limited field radiation. Results: 28 patients were enrolled from 5 centers. Of 28 patients enrolled, 3 did not complete 4 cycles of therapy (1 proceeded to ASCT after Cycle 3) and are not evaluable for response (pts came off secondary to AE of pulmonary HTN unrelated, secondary to SAE of CHF possibly related, due to PI discretion related to maximum benefit achieved), 8 patients did not undergo ASCT (1 had PD after Cycle 5), 8 patients proceeded to ASCT (1 the aforementioned patient after Cycle 3), 6 patients have completed induction and are still pre-transplant and 4 patients are still on treatment. The median age was 64 years (range 44–74), 57% were male. Cytogenetic abnormalities included 13 patients with del(13), 4 with del(17p), 2 with t(14;16) and 1 with hypodiploidy for a total of 16 patients with high-risk cytogenetics. In the dose-escalation portion of the study, the maximum administered dose tested was 56 mg/m2 carfilzomib. There was one DLT in cycle 1, of Grade 3 dyspnea, at the 56 mg/m2 level. Drug-related AEs occurring in >20% of patients included fatigue (23%) and thrombocytopenia (31%). Thirty-one percent experienced at least one Grade ≥3 AE with dyspnea and nausea as the most common. There were no deaths on study with a median follow-up of 4.9m (range: 1.1 to 13.1m). One pt came off study after Cycle 5 for PD as evidenced by new plasmacytomas. Six patients received 36-45 mg/m2 carfilzomib on the dose escalation portion of this study and 22 patients received the maximum administered dose of carfilzomib at 56 mg/m2. One patient yet to be enrolled to obtain 20 efficacy evaluable pts at the maximum dose. Twenty-three patients were response evaluable. Median of 5.7 cycles of therapy with 2 CR, 9 VGPR, 10 PR, 1 MR and 1 PD for ≥ PR rate of 91%. Of the 12 response-evaluable patients with high risk cytogenetics, 92% were ≥ PR; of the 11 standard risk patients, 91% were ≥ PR. Of 9 patients who underwent stem cell mobilization, all collected adequate stem cells and median number of stem cells collected was 12.58 (5.07-25.31) x106 CD34+ cells/kg. Conclusions: The combination of CCyD given to untreated, symptomatic patients with myeloma was well tolerated and highly active with an 87% RR and a 48% ≥ VGPR after 4 to 6 cycles. This study compares favorably with other regimens used for induction prior to transplant for the management of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Disclosures Bensinger: Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Carfilzomib for use in front-line tx of multiple myeloma . Vescio:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Gasparetto:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Nath:Celgene: Consultancy. Shah:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array: Consultancy, Research Funding. Durie:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: IRC Other; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: IRC, IRC Other.

Final Results of a Frontline Phase 1/2 Study of Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Low-Dose Dexamethasone (CRd) in Multiple Myeloma (MM)

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 631-631 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrzej J Jakubowiak ◽  
Dominik Dytfeld ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
David H. Vesole ◽  
Tara B. Anderson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Growth Factors ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees

Abstract Abstract 631 Introduction: In relapsed and/or refractory MM, the combination of carfilzomib (CFZ) with lenalidomide (Len), and low-dose dexamethasone (Dex) (CRd) has shown very promising efficacy (78% ≥partial response [PR], 40% ≥very good partial response [VGPR], and 24% CR/nCR) and good tolerability including a low rate of peripheral neuropathy (Wang et al, ASCO, 2011). In a Phase I/II study of newly diagnosed MM, the regimen was well tolerated in the Phase I portion of the study up to a maximum dose of CFZ 36 mg/m2, Len 25 mg, and Dex 40 mg, and very active with 96% ≥PR, 70% ≥VGPR, and 55% CR/nCR (Jakubowiak et al, ASH 2010). The lack of overlapping toxicities has allowed these agents to be used at full doses and for extended periods. Here we report the results for all patients (pts) enrolled in both phases of this first prospective trial of CFZ combination in new MM. Methods: In the initial eight 28-day cycles, pts were treated with CFZ at 20 mg/m2, 27 mg/m2 (Phase I), and 36 mg/m2 (Phase I and II), given IV on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16, Len at 25 mg PO (days 1–21), and Dex at 40/20 mg PO weekly (cycles 1–4/5–8). Pts achieving ≥PR could proceed to stem cell collection (SCC) using growth factors alone (protocol recommendation) and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) after 4 cycles. Per protocol, ASCT candidates were offered the option to continue CRd treatment after SCC. After 8 cycles, pts received 28-day maintenance cycles of CFZ (days 1, 2, 15, 16), Len days 1–21, and Dex weekly at the doses tolerated at the end of 8 cycles. Responses were assessed by IMWG criteria with the addition of nCR. Results: Enrollment was completed (53 pts): 4 pts at CFZ 20 mg/m2, 13 at CFZ 27 mg/m2 and 36 at CFZ 36 mg/m2 (18 in Phase I and 18 in Phase II). Median age was 59 years (range 35–81; 23 pts ≥65), 60% had ISS stage II/III, and 33% (of 49 with available data) had unfavorable cytogenetics: del 13 or hypodiploidy by metaphase, or t(4;14), t (14;16), del 17p by FISH. As of June 30, 2011, toxicity data (cycles 1–8) were available for 51 pts. Hematologic toxicities were reversible and included Grade (G) 3/4: anemia (18%), neutropenia (12%), and thrombocytopenia (10%). The most common non-hematologic toxicities (all G) were hyperglycemia (76%), hypophosphatemia (61%), and infection (53%). G3/4 non-hematologic AEs included hyperglycemia (24%), DVT/PE while on ASA prophylaxis (10%), infection (6%), and mood alteration (2%). PN was limited to G1/2 sensory (24%). Forty-five pts continue treatment with 22 pts in the maintenance phase. Six pts discontinued treatment: 2 proceeded to ASCT, 1 due to toxicity, and 3 due to events unrelated to treatment or per pt wish. The majority of pts did not require dose modifications, either in the initial (31%) or in the maintenance (25%) phase. After a median of 8 cycles (range 1–20), the best responses per IMWG criteria for 49 response-evaluable pts (all pts who completed 1+ cycle) are shown in the Table. Responses were rapid with 46/49 pts achieving at least PR after 1 cycle, and improved with the duration of treatment reaching 100% ≥PR after 4 cycles and 100% ≥VGPR, 79% CR/nCR after 12 cycles. Responses were deep even at the 2 lower dose levels with the majority of pts at 36 mg/m2 still early in treatment. Responses in pts with unfavorable cytogenetics were similar to response rates in all remaining pts and included a 100% ≥PR in 6 pts with del 17p. Twenty-four pts proceeded to SCC after a median of 5 cycles of CRd (range 4–9); using growth factors only in 23 pts and cyclophosphamide and growth factors in 1 pt, with a median 6.55 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg collected (range 3.75–9.6); all resumed CRd treatment. After a median of 9.5 months of follow-up, only 1 pt has progressed, and all are alive Conclusions: CRd is highly active and well-tolerated allowing the use of full doses for an extended time in newly-diagnosed MM pts with limited need for dose modification. Responses are rapid and improve over time reaching 100% ≥VGPR and early time-to-event data are very encouraging. These results compare favorably to the best frontline regimens in MM. Disclosures: Jakubowiak: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Off Label Use: Use of the investigational agent carfilzomib, proteasome inhibitor, in the treatment of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; OrthoBiotec.Imedex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medicom World Wide: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Optum Health Education: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PER Group: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vesole:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Hussein:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Leveque:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Vij:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau.

A Randomized Phase 3 Trial Of Melphalan-Lenalidomide-Prednisone (MPR) Or Cyclophosphamide-Prednisone-Lenalidomide (CPR) Vs Lenalidomide Plus Dexamethsone (Rd) In Elderly Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 536-536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Valeria Magarotto ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Massimo Offidani ◽  
Giuseppe Pietrantuono ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Alkylating Agents ◽  
Second Primary ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Background Rd and MPR are effective treatments in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients (pts). In this study we compared a non-alkylating containing regimen (Rd) vs alkylating-based regimens (MPR/CPR) in elderly transplant ineligible NDMM pts. Methods Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive nine 28-day cycles of MPR/CPR or Rd. 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 >75 years pts; prednisone 1.5 mg/Kg for 4 days; CPR: cyclophosphamide orally 50 mg/day for 21 days in pts 65-75 years old and 50 mg every other day (eod) in >75 years pts; lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days; prednisone 25 mg every other day. 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 >75 years. After induction, patients were randomized to receive maintenance with lenalidomide alone (10 mg/day for 21 days) or with prednisone (25 mg eod on days 1-28), until disease progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results Between October 2009 and October 2012, 659 pts were enrolled ( MPR/CPR:439 and Rd:220), and 641 pts were evaluable (MPR/CPR:430 and Rd:211). Patient characteristics were well balanced in the 2 groups: median age was 73 years in both groups, 38% of pts were older than 75 years, 27% had ISS stage III in both groups, 21% of patients both in the MPR/CPR and in the Rd groups had unfavorable FISH profile [t(4;14) or t (14;16) or del17p]. After induction, the response rates were similar in the 2 groups: at least PR rate was 75% versus 79% (p=0.52) and CR rate was 9% versus 7% (p=0.35), in the MPR/CPR and Rd group, respectively. No significant difference in response rate were reported between two alkylating containing regimens. After a median follow-up of 21 months, the 2-year PFS was 55% in MPR/CPR and 49% in Rd (HR=0.86, 95% CI: 0.66-1.12, p=0.26), and 2-year OS was 84% in MPR/CPR and 80% in Rd (HR= 0.93, 95% CI: 0.60-1.41, p=0.71) At least one grade ≥3 hematological adverse event was reported in 51% with MPR/CPR and 29% with Rd (p<0.001), with a significant difference between the two alkylating agents (67% MPR and 31% CPR, p<0.001). At least one grade ≥3 extra-hematologic toxicities were similar in the two groups (31% with MPR/CPR and 28% with Rd, p=0.77). with no difference between two alkylating agents (31% both in MPR and CPR group). Second primary malignancies (SPM) were reported in 5 MPR patients (1 hematologic and 4 solid) in 1 CPR patient (hematologic) and in 2 Rd patients (both solid). Conclusion In a community-based population, triplet alkylating combinations did not lead to different PFS or OS clinical benefits over doublet therapy. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Palumbo: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bringhen:Celgene: Honoraria. Giuliani:Celgene: Research Funding. Cavallo:Celgene: Honoraria; Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hajek:Celgene: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy. Boccadoro:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Outcome of Patients with Myelofibrosis Relapsing after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant: A Retrospective Study By the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of EBMT

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 1958-1958
Author(s):  
Donal McLornan ◽  
Richard Szydlo ◽  
Anja van Biezen ◽  
Linda Koster ◽  
Evgeny Klyuchnikov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Median Survival ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Working Party ◽  
Active Management ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background: Over the last decade, there has been a significant increase in the number of patients with Myelofibrosis (MF) undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT). However, scarce information exists on the outcome and management of those patients who relapse following SCT. Moreover, the management of relapse occurring post-SCT is often heterogeneous and ranges from palliation to intensive salvage approaches. We therefore conducted a retrospective EBMT registry analysis of adult MF patients who relapsed following first SCT episode. Results: A total of 1216 adult patients (997 (82%) with Primary MF (PMF) and 219 (18%) with secondary MF (sMF)) underwent 1st allogeneic SCT between 2000 and 2010. A total of 251 patients from this cohort (206 with PMF and 45 with sMF) had conformed relapse ≥ day 30 after HSCT and were included in the analysis. Within this relapse cohort, there were 163 males and 88 females; median age was 55 years old (range 21.5-70 years). A total of 84 patients (33%) had received Myeloablative Conditioning (MAC) and 167 patients (67%) Reduced Intensity Conditioning (RIC). Regarding donor type, there were 123 matched siblings (49%) and 128 unrelated donors (51%). Acute GVHD (aGVHD) status was available for 243/251 (97%) patients; no aGVHD was evident in 143 patients, Grade I-II aGVHD 76 patients, Grade III-IV aGVHD 22 patients and 2 patients with aGVHD ungraded. The median time to relapse after SCT was 7.1 months (range 1-111 months). The median Overall Survival (OS) from the time of relapse was 17.7 months (95% Confidence Intervals 11-24). Collectively, there was a significant difference in survival outcome for those relapsing > 7.1 months post-SCT (median survival 30.3 months post relapse) compared to those relapsing within 7.1 months following the initial SCT episode (median survival 7.9 months post relapse; p<0.001). Absence of aGVHD or grade I aGVHD only was associated with a trend towards improved survival following relapse compared to those with Grade II-IV aGVHD (p=0.12). For PMF, disease duration prior to SCT did not significantly affect outcome post relapse. Heterogeneous practice existed as regards management of the relapse episode, with considerable variation in median survival (MS) estimates. 47 patients received Donor Lymphocyte Infusions (DLI) alone (MS 76 months); 21 had chemotherapy alone (MS 23 months) whereas 14 patients had DLI combined with chemotherapy (MS 13.6 months). As regards 2nd allografts: 53 patients underwent 2nd allograft alone (MS 23.6 months) and 26 underwent DLI and 2nd SCT (MS 53.9). In 90 patients active management -if any- was not documented (most likely many were palliative) but represented a very poor risk group with a MS of only 4.8 months. Overall, there was a significant improvement in OS post relapse for those undergoing 2nd SCT (n=79) versus those who did not have a 2nd SCT (n=172; p=0.019). Conclusions : This analysis represents the first study to define the outcome of MF patients who undergo relapse following allogeneic SCT. Treatment of relapse presents huge challenges and the heterogeneous management strategies highlighted above reflects current practice where approaches range from palliation through to intensive chemotherapy and 2nd SCT. It is clear from this analysis that early relapse has a much worse prognosis than those who relapse later than 7.1 months post-SCT. There is a definite survival advantage for those who undergo DLI and/or a 2nd SCT procedure, although we acknowledge that those patients undergoing a 2nd SCT represent a highly selected group who are fit enough to undergo such intervention. Moreover, how relapse management practice will change in the era of novel therapies such as JAK inhibitors to bridge towards 2nd SCT is currently unclear and requires evaluation in prospective studies. Disclosures McLornan: Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Finke:Riemser: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Neovii, Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Medac: Research Funding. Craddock:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Sunesis: Honoraria; Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy. Apperley:BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; ARIAD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Niederwieser:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Response To First-Line Treatment In Stem Cell Transplant (SCT) and Non-SCT Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Who Are Enrolled In The Connect MM Registry

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 3207-3207
Author(s):  
Rafat Abonour ◽  
Jatin J. Shah ◽  
Brian Durie ◽  
Howard Terebelo ◽  
Cristina J Gasparetto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Initial Therapy ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Off Label ◽  
Trial Setting

Abstract Introduction The advent of new therapies for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) has resulted in improved clinical outcomes and patient (pt) survival. However, the best combination of agents from different drug classes and subsequent therapeutic strategies for pts with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM), while investigated, has not yet been established. The goal of the Connect(R) MM registry is to provide insight into the disease and explore the management and outcomes of pts with NDMM who are treated at community and academic sites in the United States. This analysis aims to describe the combinations used in NDMM outside the interventional clinical trial setting and the activity and outcome response to different regimens by class of therapeutic agents in clinical practice. Methods Connect MM is an ongoing prospective, longitudinal, observational registry of NDMM pts. This multicenter US pt registry was initiated in 2009. Pts who were newly diagnosed with symptomatic MM within 2 months of enrollment were eligible to participate. Data were collected at baseline and every 3 months. Pts who had response data 12 months after enrollment, met CRAB criteria, and received treatment were eligible for this analysis. Treated pts were stratified according to SCT status. Data on baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, and initial therapies (proteasome inhibitors [PI], IMiD(R) immunomodulating agents, alkylating agents [AA], corticosteroids, and combinations) were collected. The overall response rate (ORR), as assessed by the site investigator, was defined as the best response during the course of initial therapy and is presented as cumulative ORR over 3, 6, and 12 months. Results As of the data cutoff (April 15, 2013), 1494 pts were enrolled in the registry; 1312 pts met CRAB criteria and received treatment. Of these, 439 received SCT or were anticipated to receive (had undergone a stem cell harvest) SCT and 873 would not receive SCT (non-SCT). Mean (SD) age for SCT and non-SCT pts was 58.9 years (8.7) and 69.8 years (10.7), respectively. Majority of pts in both groups were male (62.0% vs 56.5%) and Caucasian (85.4% vs 81.4%). Among SCT pts, ISS stages were: I/II (55.1%), III (25.3%), and unknown (19.6%) and ECOG performance status (PS) was 0/1 (63.1.%), 2/3 (7.1%), and unknown (29.8%). Among non-SCT pts, ISS stages were: I/II (42.0.%), III (32.2%), and unknown (25.8%) and ECOG PS was 0/1 (56.6%), 2/3/4 (14.7%), and unknown (28.8%). ORR to initial therapy and 1-year survival for the 5 most commonly used regimens are presented in the Table. A triplet regimen is 2 times more likely to be selected for SCT pts than for non-SCT pts, suggesting investigator bias in selecting more aggressive therapy for younger pts. For the 5 most commonly used regimens, 1-year survival was 97.9% for SCT pts and 83.3% for non-SCT pts. Conclusion Outside an interventional clinical trial setting, the most commonly used initial treatment regimens for NDMM were IMiD + PI + steroid for SCT pts and PI + steroid for non-SCT pts. Response rates were higher among SCT pts regardless of regimen. The investigator-assessed response rates were similar across the various combinations including 2 vs 3 drug combinations in SCT pts. Disclosures: Abonour: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Millennium: Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: This abstract will report on an observational study. There is no pre-specified use of drugs; treating physicians determined what drugs to use and some could be off-label. Shah:Millenium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding. Durie:Celgene: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy. Terebelo:Amgen: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria. Gasparetto:Celgene ( 2012): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium (2012): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mehta:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Narang:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Sullivan:Celgene: Employment. Srinivasan:Celgene: Employment. Nagarwala:Celgene: Employment. Rifkin:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Melphalan/Prednisone/Lenalidomide (MPR) Versus High-Dose Melphalan and Autologous Transplantation (MEL200) in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (MM) Patients <65 Years: Results of a Randomized Phase III Study

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 3069-3069 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Federica Cavallo ◽  
Izhar Hardan ◽  
Barbara Lupo ◽  
Valter Redoglia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
High Dose Melphalan

Abstract Abstract 3069FN2 Background: High-dose chemotherapy with haemopoietic stem-cell improves outcome in multiple myeloma (MM). The introduction of novel agents questions the role of autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) in MM patients. Aims: In this prospective randomized study, we compared conventional melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) with tandem high-dose melphalan (MEL200) in newly diagnosed MM patients younger than 65 years. Methods: All patients (N=402) received four 28-day cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg, d1-21) and low-dose dexamethasone (40 mg, d1, 8, 15, 22) (Rd) as induction. As consolidation, patients were randomized to MPR (N=202) consisting of six 28-day cycles of melphalan (0.18 mg/kg d1-4), prednisone (2 mg/kg d1-4) and lenalidomide (10 mg d1-21); or tandem melphalan 200 mg/m2 MEL200 (N=200) with stem-cell support. All patients enrolled were stratified according to International Staging System (stages 1 and 2 vs. stage 3) and age (<60 vs. ≥60 years). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary end point. Data were analyzed in intention-to-treat. Results: Response rates were similar: at least very good partial response (≥VGPR) rate was 60% with MPR vs. 58% with MEL200 (p=.24); the complete response (CR) rate was 20% with MPR vs. 25% with MEL200 (p=.49). After a median follow-up of 26 months, the 2-year PFS was 54% in MPR and 73% in MEL200 (HR=0.51, p<.001). The 2-year overall survival (OS) was similar in the two groups: 87% with MPR and 90% with MEL200 (HR 0.68, p=.19). In a subgroup analysis, MEL200 significantly prolonged PFS in both standard-risk patients without t(4;14) or t(14;16) or del17p abnormalities (2-year PFS was 46% in the MPR group vs. 78% in the MEL200 group, HR=0.57, p=.007) and high-risk patients with t(4;14) or t(14;16) or del17p abnormalities (2-year PFS was 27% for MPR vs. 71% for MEL200, HR=0.32, p=.004). In patients who achieved CR, the 2-year PFS was 66% for MPR vs. 87% for MEL200 (HR 0.26; p<.001); in those who achieved a partial response (PR), the 2-year PFS was 56% for MPR vs. 77% for MEL200 (HR 0.45; p<.001). In the MPR and MEL200 groups, G3-4 neutropenia was 55% vs. 89% (p<.001); G3-4 infections were 0% vs. 17% (p<.001); G3-4 gastrointestinal toxicity was 0% vs. 21% (p<.001); the incidence of second tumors was 0.5% in MPR patients and 1.5% in MEL200 patients (p=.12). Deep vein thrombosis rate was 2.44% with MPR vs. 1.13% with MEL200 (p=.43). Conclusions: PFS was significantly prolonged in the MEL200 group compared to MPR. This benefit was maintained in the subgroup of patients with standard- or high-risk cytogenetic features. Toxicities were significantly higher in the MEL200 group. This is the first report showing a PFS advantage for ASCT in comparison with conventional therapies including novel agents. These data will be updated at the meeting. Disclosures: Palumbo: celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cavallo:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Cavo:celgene: Honoraria. Ria:celgene: Consultancy. Caravita Di Toritto:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Di Raimondo:celgene: Honoraria. Boccadoro:celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Once a Week Bortezomib with Dexamethasone Is Effective with Limited Toxicity in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients with Older Age and Co-Morbidities,

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 3964-3964
Author(s):  
Nikhil C. Munshi ◽  
Saem Lee ◽  
Suman Kambhampati ◽  
Michal Rose ◽  
Abid Mohiuddin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Autologous Stem Cell Transplant ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Respiratory Problems ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 3964 Background: Bortezomib in combination with dexamethsone is administered twice a week for 2 weeks with excellent therapeutic outcome. However, in a proportion of patients it is associated with toxicities such as neuropathy and twice a week regimen is inconvenient especially in older patients. To improve convenience and compliance, we have investigated the efficacy and safety of a weekly bortezomib regimen. Methods: We conducted a phase II multi-center single-arm study in participating Veterans Hospitals (VA) nationwide evaluating bortezomib administered at 1.6 mg/m2 IV weekly for 4 weeks with 1 week off with dexamethasone 40mg PO on the day of and day after bortezomib for upto 6 cycles in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients not considered for autologous stem cell transplant. The objective is to evaluate overall response rate (ORR) and toxicity of this regimen. Results: We have enrolled all planned 50 patients (median age-71; range 50–89) at 12 VA Hospitals. Patients had significant co-morbidities including 86% with cardiovascular problems, 67% with diabetes and/or hyperlipidemia, 54% with renal dysfunction, 37% with respiratory problems, and 18% with history of cancer. All patients were on at least 5 daily medications. Of the 50 patients enrolled, 42 patients have received at least 1 cycle of therapy and were evaluable for toxicity and efficacy. With a median of 4 cycles administered, this regimen was very well tolerated. Ten patients experienced neuropathy: 6 patients experienced grade 1, two patients developed grade 2 neuropathy, while two patients who had grade 1 neuropathy at diagnosis increased to grade 2 neuropathy with pain, and the other patient increased to grade 3 neuropathy with pain, with an overall Grade 3 neuropathy rate of 2.4%.Dexamethasone dose was reduced in 30% while bortezomib dose was reduced in 10% of the patients. Additionally, grade ≥1 asthenia was observed in 52%, constipation in 38%, diarrhea in 34%, anemia in 64%, vomiting/nausea in 26%, and thrombocytopenia in 54%. Four patients have died of co-morbidities which were considered unrelated or probably unrelated to the treatment with bortezomib. Of the patients who received at least 1 cycle of therapy, 62% patients achieved ≥PR; 12% CR/nCR and an additional 14% achieved VGPR. Including MR in the analysis, ORR was observed in 90% of the evaluable patients. On intent to treat analysis including all 50 patients, ORR was observed in 76% patients and ≥ PR in 52% patients. Conclusions: Once a week bortezomib with dexamethasone regimen is effective and well tolerated even in older patients with significant co-morbidities and should be considered as an important option in multiple myeloma. Disclosures: Munshi: Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: 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; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Yellapragada:Celgene: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Roodman:Amgen: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy.

scholarly journals Treatment Regimens for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Who Are Ineligible for Stem Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4741-4741 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesus F San-Miguel ◽  
Thierry Facon ◽  
Meletios A Dimopoulos ◽  
Maria-Victoria Mateos ◽  
Michele Cavo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Treatment Regimens

Abstract Background: In patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (ndMM) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone regimen (VMP) is standard of care as a first-line treatment in most regions of the world. Daratumumab is a new monoclonal antibody aimed to improve outcomes in ndMM. The ongoing ALCYONE study demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR) for the combination of daratumumab plus VMP (D-VMP) compared to VMP in transplant-ineligible ndMM patients (Mateos, 2018). While direct head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking, it is important to assess how D-VMP compares with other treatment regimens used in clinical practice for ndMM patients who are ineligible for ASCT. Aims: The aim of this study is to investigate the comparative effectiveness (PFS, ORR) of D-VMP with other relevant treatment regimens used in patients with ndMM who are ineligible for ASCT. Methods: We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) based on RCTs identified through a systematic literature review (SLR). Both fixed effects and random effects models were tested. The results are depicted in a network of evidence, forest plots, ranking histograms and probabilities of D-VMP being better than the comparator treatment regimens. Results: The SLR revealed 25 RCTs conducted in patients with ndMM who are ineligible for ASCT. For PFS, the NMA included 20 RCTs covering 20 treatments and for ORR, the NMA included 20 RCTs covering 21 treatments. Random-effects model is preferred for PFS as well as for ORR as this model showed lower deviance information criterion (DIC), and as the homogeneity assumption was violated for PFS. The results for both PFS and ORR are summarized in Table 1. For PFS and ORR, D-VMP ranked first in the evidence of network. For PFS, D-VMP was statistically significantly more effective compared to 10 out of the 19 treatment regimens. For ORR, D-VMP was significantly more effective as compared to 12 out of the 20 treatment regimens. Conclusion: In the absence of head-to-head RCTs, NMAs allow delineation of the comparative effectiveness of different treatments. This NMA suggests that D-VMP has a higher potential of being effective in improving ORR and PFS in patients with ndMM who are ineligible for transplant compared to other available treatment options. Updated results based on a 1-year update of ALCYONE will be presented at the meeting. References: Mateos MV, Dimopoulos MA, Cavo M, Suzuki K, Jakubowiak A, Knop S, Doyen C, Lucio P, Nagy Z, Kaplan P, Pour L, Cook M, Grosicki S, Crepaldi A, Liberati AM, Campbell P, Shelekhova T, Yoon SS, Iosava G, Fujisaki T, Garg M, Chiu C, Wang J, Carson R, Crist W, Deraedt W, Nguyen H, Qi M, San-Miguel J; ALCYONE Trial Investigators. Daratumumab plus Bortezomib, Melphalan, and Prednisone for Untreated Myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2018 Feb 8;378(6):518-528 Disclosures San-Miguel: Amgen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria. Facon:Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Dimopoulos:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Mateos:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: 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; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cavo:Janssen: 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; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Heeg:Ingress-health Nederland BV: Employment, Equity Ownership, Research Funding. van Beekhuizen:Ingress Health: Consultancy. Pisini:Janssen Research & Development, LLC: Employment. Nair:Janssen Research & Development, LLC: Employment. Lam:Janssen Global Services, LLC: Employment. Slavcev:Janssen Global Services, LLC: Employment.

scholarly journals The Effect of Maintenance Therapy Following Salvage Autologous Stem Cell Transplant in Multiple Myeloma Patients

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3439-3439
Author(s):  
Brandon B. Wang ◽  
Mark A. Fiala ◽  
Mark A. Schroeder ◽  
Tanya Wildes ◽  
Armin Ghobadi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Stem Cell Transplant ◽  
Autologous Stem Cell Transplant ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: In the current era, autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) remains an effective form of treatment for patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM), but it is not curative and a relapse is inevitable. A second, or salvage, ASCT provides better outcomes than conventional chemotherapy but it is infrequently used. Maintenance therapy after initial ASCT has been adopted as the standard in the US; however, there is limited data on the effects of maintenance therapy following salvage ASCT and the benefits are still unclear. Methods: We performed retrospective chart review of all patients with MM who received a second, salvage ASCT at time of first relapse at Washington University in St. Louis from 2008 to 2016. We identified two cohorts of patients, those who received maintenance therapy following salvage ASCT and those who did not. Patients who received maintenance therapy post-initial ASCT were excluded as the objective of this study was to determine the impact of maintenance post-salvage ASCT and maintenance post-initial ASCT may confound the results. Results: Sixty-five patients (who underwent second/salvage ASCT) were identified. Three were excluded from the analysis-two had treatment-related mortality following salvage ASCT and one received maintenance other than a proteasome inhibitor (PI) or an immunomodulatory drug (IMID). The maintenance cohort consisted of 31 patients, with 68% (n = 21) males and 32% (n = 10) females; the median age at salvage ASCT was 61 years (range 38-73). The no-maintenance cohort consisted of 31 patients as well with 45% (n = 14) males and 55% (n = 17) females. Their median age at salvage ASCT was 62 years (range 44-74). The characteristics of the two cohorts are summarized in Table 1. Most patients received PIs and/or IMIDs as part of their induction regimens prior to initial ASCT. All received melphalan conditioning. The response to treatment was similar between the two cohorts, with respective CR rates of 68% (n = 21) and 77% (n = 24) and median progression-free survival (PFS) of 46 months compared to 33 months. Following relapse, 16% (n = 5) of patients in the no-maintenance cohort proceeded directly to salvage ASCT without re-induction. All other patients received re-induction, mostly with PIs and/or IMIDs, with a median of 4 cycles for the maintenance cohort and 2 cycles for the no-maintenance cohort. For conditioning prior to salvage ASCT, 4 patients received Velcade-BEAM conditioning as part of a prospective trial at our site (NCT01653418); 3 from the maintenance cohort and 1 from the no-maintenance cohort. The rest received melphalan conditioning. Both cohorts had a CR rate of 52% (n = 16) post-salvage ASCT. Maintenance therapy after salvage ASCT consisted of lenalidomide (74%, n = 23), bortezomib (23%, n = 7), or pomalidomide (3%, n = 1). Three of the patients on bortezomib were originally started on lenalidomide but were switched due to intolerance. At time of data collection, the median follow-up was 49 months (range 9-105) for the maintenance cohort and 61 months (range 19-113) for the no-maintenance cohort. 45% (n = 14) of patients in the maintenance cohort and 90% (n = 28) of the no-maintenance cohort had relapsed. In the maintenance cohort, PFS following salvage ASCT was similar to what was observed following initial ASCT. The median estimated PFS post-salvage ASCT was 53 months (95% CI 42-64) compared to 46 months post initial ASCT (p = 0.144). Conversely, in the no-maintenance cohort PFS following salvage was only about 60% that of initial ASCT (21 months [95% CI 18-24]; compared to 33 months; p = 0.002). Conclusion: These results suggest that maintenance following salvage ASCT is associated with improved outcomes. Although patients who received maintenance post-initial ASCT were excluded, the benefits of maintenance post-salvage ASCT may extend to them as well. Ongoing prospective clinical trials will further clarify these benefits. Disclosures Schroeder: Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wildes:Janssen: Research Funding. Vij:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jansson: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharma: 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; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document