scholarly journals Real-World Outcomes With Generic Pomalidomide in Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma—Experience From a Tertiary Care Cancer Center

2021 ◽  
pp. 361-367
Author(s):  
Suresh Kumar Bondili ◽  
Bhausaheb Bagal ◽  
Abhinav Zawar ◽  
Pradeep Ventrapati ◽  
Jayashree Thorat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Median Progression Free Survival

PURPOSE The prognosis of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) that is refractory to bortezomib and lenalidomide is very poor wherein the median survival is between 3 and 9 months. We did this retrospective analysis to study the pattern of utilization, tolerance, and outcomes with pomalidomide in these patients having RRMM. MATERIALS AND METHODS Retrospective analysis of all the patients who were treated with generic pomalidomide at Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, during the period of May 2017 to March 2019 was done. Patients with secretory disease and who had completed at least one cycle of pomalidomide were analyzed for response rates, toxicity, and survival outcomes. RESULTS A total of 81 patients received pomalidomide-based therapy during this study period, out of which 75 were included in the survival analysis. Forty-eight patients (59.3%) were refractory to both lenalidomide and bortezomib. Overall response rate was 58.7%. Five patients (6.7%) achieved complete response, very good partial response was seen in 13 patients (17.3%), and partial response was seen in 26 patients (34.7%). After a median follow-up of 11 months (range 2-27 months), median progression-free survival was 9.1 months (95% CI, 5.4 to 12.9 months). Median progression-free survival for patients who were refractory to both lenalidomide and bortezomib versus nonrefractory was 5.5 and 12.6 months, respectively, which was significant statistically ( P = .04, hazard ratio, 0.35, 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.97). The median overall survival was not reached. Important toxicities included anemia (28%), neutropenia (16%), pneumonia (16%), and venous thrombosis (5%). CONCLUSION Generic pomalidomide-based therapy is an effective option and is well tolerated in patients with RRMM. Higher response rates and longer survival seen in our study are possibly because of heterogeneity of the study population.

A Phase II Trial of Doxil, Vincristine and Reduced Schedule Dexamethasone (DVd) for Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 2415-2415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Masci ◽  
Mary A. Karam ◽  
Luba Platt ◽  
Steven Andresen ◽  
Alan Lichtin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Liposomal Doxorubicin ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Median Progression Free Survival ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) typically have responses to initial cytotoxic or steroid based therapy. Disease relapse occurs in all patients. As high as 90% of patients with relapsed or refractory disease will have over-expression of the multi-drug resistance (MDR) gene. Pharmacokinetic data suggest that prolonged exposure to high concentrations of doxorubicin can overcome MDR. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin can theoretically achieve this goal as the angiogenic activity of the MM bone marrow is significantly increased. We proceeded with a phase II trial to evaluate the response rate of patients with relapsed or refractory MM (R/R-MM) to the DVd regimen. Eligible patients had clinically active R/R-MM following at least one prior cytotoxic based treatment regimen. Patients received intravenous (IV) pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 40 mg/m2 day 1, vincristine 2 mg day 1 and oral or IV dexamethasone 40 mg daily days 1–4. Cycles were repeated every 28 days for a minimum of 6 cycles and 2 cycles after best response. Myeloma parameters were measured at the start of each cycle. SWOG criteria were used to determine response. Thirty-five patients (21 male and 14 female) with R/R-MM clinically active disease were enrolled. Median age was 59 years (range 43–87). Patients received a median of 2 (range 1–4) prior cytotoxic based treatments. All patients received at least one cycle of treatment (median=5; range 1–12) and were evaluable for response. Ten (29%) patients responded to therapy; 5 partial responses (PR > 50%) and 5 responses (R > 75%) were observed after a median of 2 cycles (range 1–9). Median progression free survival of responding patients (PR + R) was 4.5 mos. (range 0.67–44.8). Patients achieving R had a median progression free survival of 32.5 mos. (3.0–44.8). Thirteen (37%) patients had stable disease (SD) for a median of 1.4 mos. (range 0.8–9.9). Twelve (34%) patients had progressive disease after a median of 1 cycle (range 1–5). The most common toxicities were hematologic; there were four occurrences of febrile neutropenia. Three patients experienced grade 3 constipation and one grade 3 palmar-plantar erythrodysethesia was observed. This study suggests that in patients with R/R-MM, DVd alone yields response rates similar to bortezomib with patients achieving an R experiencing a durable plateau phase. Ongoing studies of DVd in combination with thalidomide or CC-5013 in patients with R/R-MM have resulted in higher and better quality response rates (comparable to autologous SCT) translating to a durable progression free survival. We would not recommend the DVd regimen in patients with R/R-MM without the addition of an immune modulator such as thalidomide.

Treatment sequencing patterns for relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the era of new therapies in a single center institution.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19513-e19513
Author(s):  
Alexandre Tungesvik ◽  
Praneeth Reddy Sudalagunta ◽  
Jessica Huang ◽  
Elizabeth Dimaggio ◽  
Gabe De Avila ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Response To Therapy ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
New Therapies ◽  
First Response ◽  
Line Of Therapy

e19513 Background: Although there is much to be optimistic about in the multiple myeloma community as the approval of new therapies and regimen-combinations for relapsed refractory disease continues to grow, determining the best option for a patient can be complicated. Both carfilzomib- (C) and daratumumab- (D) based regimens have demonstrated superior efficacy in this setting, but there is a paucity of data supporting which should be selected first, and if regimen sequence influences outcomes. The aim of this study is to describe sequencing patterns in the era of these newer agents and to determine if there is a difference in outcomes for patients with RRMM who received one of the following treatment sequences: C-regimen with a D-regimen given immediately prior (DC); C-regimen without any prior D (C only); D-regimen with a C-regimen given immediately prior (CD); or D-regimen without any prior C (D only). Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of patients with RRMM consecutively treated at Moffitt Cancer Center between 1/1/2015 and 6/25/18. Response to therapy was assessed using the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria. Progression-free survival (PFS) was measured in days from the start of therapy to progression. Time to response (TTR) was measured in days from the start of therapy to first response. Results: 132 patients with RRMM who received 1-3 prior lines of therapy with at least one line of therapy containing either C or D were identified. Overall, the majority of patients were treated with C only (n = 101), 10 received DC, 31 received D only, and 35 received CD. In patients that received C only, partial response (PR) was achieved in 38%, very good partial response (VGPR) was 20%, and stringent complete response (sCR) was 2%. In patients that received DC, PR was 20% and VGPR was 10%; no patient achieved a sCR. Of the patients that received D only, PR was 29%, VGPR was 10%, and sCR was 3%. In patients that received CD, PR was 31% and VGPR was 26%; no patient achieved sCR. Median PFS in patients who received C only, DC, D only, and CD was 117 days, 126 days, 104 days, and 190 days, respectively. TTR in patients who received C only, DC, D only, and CD was 82 days, 39 days, 98 days, and 88 days, respectively. Conclusions: The data suggests that RRMM patients who receive either CD or DC appear to have a PFS advantage over those patients who did not. Notably, an early TTR was found in patients that received DC. Further analysis is ongoing.

Continuous Administration of Low-Dose Cyclophosphamide and Prednisone as a Salvage Treatment for Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 4962-4962
Author(s):  
Fan Zhou ◽  
Lieping Guo ◽  
Haotian Shi ◽  
Chenhui Lin ◽  
Jian Hou
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Salvage Therapy ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Severe Infection ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Comorbid Conditions ◽  
Conventional Chemotherapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Median Progression Free Survival

Abstract Abstract 4962 Objective To assess the efficacy and tolerability of continuous low-dose cyclophosphamide and prednisone regimen (CP) as a salvage therapy for multiple myeloma (MM). Method The CP regimen consisted of oral cyclophosphamide at 50 mg and prednisone at 15 mg daily. A total of 27 consecutive patients received the CP regimen: 19 patients had severe comorbid conditions; 8 were unwilling to continue conventional chemotherapy due to severe infection associated with conventional treatment. All patients had received 1-4 chemotherapeutic regimens prior to the current study. Result The overall response rate (complete remission, very good partial response, and partial response) was 66.7%. The median time to response was 2 months. In the patients who responded to the treatment, the median progression-free survival has not been reached. In the non-responding patients, the median progression-free survival was 4 months. In patients with severe comorbid conditions and unwilling to accept conventional chemotherapy because of severe infection, the physical conditions improved significantly. Conclusion Continuous low-dose CP regimen is an effective and well-tolerated salvage therapy for MM. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcome of Bortezomib Retreatment in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jae-Sook Ahn ◽  
Sung-Hoon Jung ◽  
Seung-Shin Lee ◽  
Seo-Yeon Ahn ◽  
Deok-Hwan Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Sensory Neuropathy ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Peripheral Sensory ◽  
Good Partial Response

This retrospective study investigated the clinical efficacy and safety of bortezomib retreatment in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). A total of 30 patients who relapsed or progressed after≥6 months since the last dose of their previous bortezomib therapy were included in this study. During the median 6 cycles (range: 2–12) of bortezomib retreatment, 10 (33.3%), 2 (6.7%), and 6 (20.0%) patients achieved complete response, very good partial response, and partial response, respectively. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (47.0%), thrombocytopenia (43.0%), anemia (10.0%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (3.0%) were observed. The median time to progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival were 5.8 months (95% CI: 2.6–9.0), 5.5 months (95% CI: 4.2–6.8), and 13.4 months (95% CI: 6.1–20.7), respectively. Patients who received bortezomib retreatment≥12 months from initial last therapy had a 1-year OS rate of 65.8% (95% CI: 43.5–88.1) while patients receiving retreatment after 6–12 months interval had a 1-year OS rate of 41.7% (95% CI: 13.9–69.5) (P=0.038). In conclusion, this study demonstrates that retreatment with bortezomib is an effective strategy for patients with MM who relapsed at a long interval after initial bortezomib therapy.

scholarly journals Bortezomib, Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone (VRD) Versus Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone (Ld) for Newly-Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma- a Randomized Phase III Study

Blood ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 130 (Suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 906-906
Author(s):  
Anjali Mookerjee ◽  
Ritu Gupta ◽  
Shivali Jasrotia ◽  
Ranjit Sahoo ◽  
Rakesh Kumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Median Progression Free Survival ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: In this prospective study, we compared VRD with Ld as induction therapy for newly-diagnosed Multiple myeloma patients. The primary objective of this study is to compare the progression-free survival in the 2 arms. Methods: Between September 2014 and Oct 2016, 144 patients have been recruited and randomly assigned to receive 4 cycles of either Bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 SC on days 1, 8, 15 and 22 with Lenalidomide 15mg/day from day 1 to 14 (Arm A) or Lenalidomide 25 mg/day from day 1 to 21 (Arm B). Patients in both arms received oral dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1,8,15 and 22. Both treatment regimens were 28-day cycles. All patients received 75 mg aspirin daily, acyclovir prophylaxis and monthly zoledronic acid. Response assessment was done at the end of the 4th cycle using the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) uniform response criteria. The study was approved by the Institute Ethics Committee (Ref IEC/NP-264/01-08-2014, RP-7/2014). Results: These are the results from an analysis of 143 patients (arm A-74, arm B-69). Baseline characteristics of patients were similar in both arms with respect to age, gender, ISS and DS stage, immunoglobulin subtype and serum LDH. Patients' median age is 56 years (range 31-70) in arm A and 52 years (range 28-69) in arm B. Gender M/F: Arm A 54/20 and 43/26 in arm B. ISS stage III 51 (68.9%) arm A vs 44 (63.8%) arm B. Serum LDH raised to >250 u/L was observed in 25 (44.6%) vs 31 (52.5%) in arms A and B, p=0.4. Revised staging including ISS and serum LDH at baseline: stage III 47 (81%) and 37 (65%) in arms A and B respectively. 14 (18.9%) and 19 (27.5%) of patients had light chain myeloma in arms A and B respectively. Overall response rates (sCR+CR+VGPR+PR) is 78.4% vs 73.9% in arms A and B respectively, p=0.6; sCR + CR 21 (28.4%) and 21 (30.4%) respectively, p=0.86. Median follow-up 17.1 months (range 1 to 33). Median overall survival (OS) is 30.2 months (95% CI 28.2 to 32.2) and 28.6 months (95%CI 26 to 31.3) in arms A and B respectively, p=0.3. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 27.8 months (95%CI 25.4 to 30.2) and 28 months (95%CI 24.6 to 31.4) respectively, p=0.3. Estimated one-year OS is 88% vs 85% in arms A and B, and PFS 83% vs 72%, respectively. Grade 3 anemia occurred in one patient in arm B, and grade 3 deep vein thromboses in one patient in arm A. One patient in arm A developed grade 4 myelosuppression leading to therapy change at the end of the first cycle. Conclusion: In this analysis - response rates and median progression-free survival are similar in both arms. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Isatuximab for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: review of key subgroup analyses from the Phase III ICARIA-MM study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul G Richardson ◽  
Simon J Harrison ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Fredrik Schjesvold ◽  
Kwee Yong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Treatment Need ◽  
Disease Response ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Unmet Treatment Need

In the Phase III ICARIA-MM study (NCT02990338), the addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody isatuximab to pomalidomide and dexamethasone led to increased progression-free survival and improved response rates in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. There is an unmet treatment need, particularly among patients with poor prognoses, including those with high-risk cytogenetics, those who have renal impairment, those who are elderly and those who are refractory to prior lines of treatment. In this review, the subgroup analyses from the ICARIA-MM study, representing subpopulations with poor prognostic factors, are discussed. Overall, the addition of isatuximab to pomalidomide and dexamethasone improved progression-free survival and disease response rates across different subgroups, regardless of prognostic factor.

scholarly journals Treatment of double-refractory multiple myeloma

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 58-73
Author(s):  
S. V. Semochkin
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Monoclonal Antibodies ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Median Progression Free Survival

In most publications on relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma, the term double-refractory refers to the loss of response to lenalidomide and proteasome inhibitors. The prognosis in the case of double-refractory multiple myeloma is poor. Usually, these are severely pretreated patients who have accumulated drug toxicity after 2 or more lines of therapy, with limited reserves of bone marrow hematopoiesis and often decompensated comorbidities. A partial solution to the problem was to use certain new drugs that have demonstrated activity as monotherapy or in combination with dexamethasone in this group of patients. This review is aimed to provide a critical review of recent clinical studies addressing this issue. According to the recent European Hematology Association and European Society for Medical Oncology (EHA-ESMO) 2021 guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of double-refractory multiple myeloma, triple combinations should be considered, including monoclonal antibodies (elotuzumab (Elo), isatuximab (Isa), daratumumab (Dara)), dexamethasone and pomalidomide (Elo-­Pd, Isa-­Pd, Dara-­Pd) or carfilzomib (Isa-Kd, Dara-Kd). In Russia, as of March 2021, the first two regimens were approved (Elo-­Pd, Isa-­Pd). Elotuzumab was tested in combination with pomalidomide in the randomized phase II ELOQUENT-3 trial (Elo-­Pd vs. Pd; n = 177). Median progression-free survival was 10.3 months on Elo-­Pd vs. 4.7 months on Pd (hazard ratio 0.54; 95 % confidence interval 0.34–0.86; р = 0.008). Elo-­Pd superiority was observed in all subgroups, including patients with double-refractory MM, high-risk cytogenetic aberrations del17p, t(4;14), t(14;16), and increased serum LDH. The Isa-­Pd triplet was approved in the randomized phase III ICARIA-MM study (Isa-­Pd vs. Pd; n = 307). The median progression-free survival in this protocol was 11.5 months in the Isa-­Pd group vs. 6.5 months in the Pd group (hazard ratio 0.596; 95 % confidence interval 0.44–0.81; р = 0.001). Isa-­Pd triplet superiority was demonstrated in all unfavorable prognostic subgroups, including lenalidomide-refractory patients, patients with high-risk cytogenetics, and doublerefractory patients. New triplets with monoclonal antibodies represent an important option for the treatment of doublerefractory multiple myeloma.

Safety and efficacy of single-agent lenalidomide in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (4) ◽  
pp. 772-778 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Richardson ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
Mohamad Hussein ◽  
James Berenson ◽  
Seema Singhal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Prior Treatment ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is effective for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM); however, toxicities from dexamethasone can be dose limiting. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide monotherapy in patients with relapsed and refractory MM. Patients (N = 222) received lenalidomide 30 mg/day once daily (days 1-21 every 28 days) until disease progression or intolerance. Response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), and safety were assessed. Overall, 67% of patients had received 3 or more prior treatment regimens. Partial response or better was reported in 26% of patients, with minimal response 18%. There was no difference between patients who had received 2 or fewer versus 3 or more prior treatment regimens (45% vs 44%, respectively). Median values for TTP, PFS, and OS were 5.2, 4.9, and 23.2 months, respectively. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (60%), thrombocytopenia (39%), and anemia (20%), which proved manageable with dose reduction. Grade 3 or 4 febrile neutropenia occurred in 4% of patients. Lenalidomide monotherapy is active in relapsed and refractory MM with acceptable toxicities. These data support treatment with single-agent lenalidomide, as well as its use in steroid-sparing combination approaches. The study is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00065351.

Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is more effective than dexamethasone alone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma regardless of prior thalidomide exposure

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (12) ◽  
pp. 4445-4451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Wang ◽  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Christine Chen ◽  
M. Teresa Cibeira ◽  
Michel Attal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Survival Studies

AbstractThis analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide + dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) previously treated with thalidomide. Of 704 patients, 39% were thalidomide exposed. Thalidomide-exposed patients had more prior lines of therapy and longer duration of myeloma than thalidomide-naive patients. Lenalidomide + dexamethasone led to higher overall response rate (ORR), longer time to progression (TTP), and progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo + dexamethasone despite prior thalidomide exposure. Among lenalidomide + dexamethasone-treated patients, ORR was higher in thalidomide-naive versus thalidomide-exposed patients (P = .04), with longer median TTP (P = .04) and PFS (P = .02). Likewise for dexamethasone alone-treated patients (P = .03 for ORR, P = .03 for TTP, P = .06 for PFS). Prior thalidomide did not affect survival in lenalidomide + dexamethasone-treated patients (36.1 vs 33.3 months, P > .05). Thalidomide-naive and thalidomide-exposed patients had similar toxicities. Lenalidomide + dexamethasone resulted in higher rates of venous thromboembolism, myelosuppression, and infections versus placebo + dexamethasone, independent of prior thalidomide exposure. Lenalido-mide + dexamethasone was superior to placebo + dexamethasone, independent of prior thalidomide exposure. Although prior thalidomide may have contributed to inferior TTP and PFS compared with thalidomide-naive patients, these parameters remained superior compared with placebo + dexamethasone; similar benefits compared with placebo + dexamethasone were not evident for thalidomide-exposed patients in terms of overall survival. Studies were registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov under NCT00056160 and NCT00424047.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document