A randomised phase III trial of thalidomide plus dexamethasone versus dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (E1A00): A trial coordinated by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (14_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6508-6508 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. V. Rajkumar ◽  
E. Blood ◽  
D. H. Vesole ◽  
R. Shepard ◽  
P. R. Greipp
Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 799-799 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Vincent Rajkumar ◽  
Susanna Jacobus ◽  
Natalie Callander ◽  
Rafael Fonseca ◽  
David Vesole ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Lenalidomide has shown efficacy in patients with relapsed myeloma in phase II and III clinical trials, and is currently being investigated as initial therapy for the disease. We report results of a phase III trial comparing lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone (Dex) versus lenalidomide plus low-dose Dex as first line therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Methods: Pts with newly diagnosed, untreated, symptomatic MM were eligible. Pts in both arms received lenalidomide 25 mg/day PO on days 1–21 every 28 days. In addition, patients in the high-dose Dex arm (Arm A) received Dex 40 mg on days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20 PO every 28 days, while pts in the low-dose Dex arm (Arm B) received Dex 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 PO every 28 days. The primary endpoint was best response at 4 months on intent to treat basis. At 4 months pts could go off study for stem cell transplant or elect to continue therapy until progression. Response was defined as a decrease in serum and urine monoclonal (M) protein by 50% or higher. If the serum M protein was unmeasurable, a 90% or higher decrease in urine M protein was required. Responses need to be confirmed at least 4 weeks apart. Patients with disease progression or not responding to lenalidomide within 4 months switched to thalidomide with the same dose of dexamethasone they were receiving (Arms C and D, respectively). An independent Data Monitoring Committee approved release of these results. Results: 445 pts were enrolled: 223 randomized to Arm A and 222 to Arm B. Median age was 65 yrs. Serious adverse event data based on expedited reporting (AdEERS) is available on all pts (see table). Common adverse events of Grade 3 or higher were thromboembolism (18.4% in arm A vs 5.4% in Arm B), infection/pneumonia (18.8% vs 9.0%) and hyperglycemia (5.8% vs 1.8%). Incidence of any grade 4 or higher toxicity was 22.0% in Arm A vs 12.6% in Arm B. Response data is being analyzed. Conclusions: Lenalidomide plus two different schedules of Dex was investigated in this phase III trial. Preliminary results suggest that toxicity rates are higher in the high-dose Dex arm. The differences in the response rates between the two arms will dictate future trials and clinical practice. Major Toxicties (AdEERS) Toxicity Arm A (n=223) Arm B (n=222) Cardiac ischemia (Grade >=3) 2.7% 0.5% Hyperglycemia (Grade >=3) 5.8% 1.8% Infection/Pneumonitis (Grade >=3) 18.8% 9.0% Neuropathy (Grade >=3) 0.9% 0.9% Thromboembolism (Grade >=3) 18.4% 5.4% Any non-Hem toxicity (Grade >=3) 53.4% 36.0% Any toxicity (Grade >=4) 22.0% 12.6% Death (Grade 5) 4.5% 1.4%


2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (8) ◽  
pp. 2114-2122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan H. Schiller ◽  
Sudeshna Adak ◽  
David Cella ◽  
Russell F. DeVore ◽  
David H. Johnson

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of topotecan in combination with standard chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) conducted a phase III trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had measurable or assessable disease and an ECOG performance status of 0 to 2; stable brain metastases were allowed. All patients received four cycles of cisplatin and etoposide every 3 weeks (step 1; PE). Patients with stable or responding disease were then randomized to observation or four cycles of topotecan (1.5 mg/m2/d for 5 days, every 3 weeks; step 2). A total of 402 eligible patients were registered to step 1, and 223 eligible patients were registered to step 2 (observation, n = 111; topotecan, n = 112). RESULTS: Complete and partial response rates to induction PE were 3% and 32%, respectively. A 7% response rate was observed with topotecan (complete response, 2%; partial response, 5%). The median survival time for all 402 eligible patients was 9.6 months. Progression-free survival (PFS) from date of randomization on step 2 was significantly better with topotecan compared with observation (3.6 months v 2.3 months; P < .001). However, overall survival from date of randomization on step 2 was not significantly different between the observation and topotecan arms (8.9 months v 9.3 months; P = .43). Grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 50% and 3%, respectively, of PE patients in step 1 and 60% and 13% of topotecan patients in step 2. Grade 4/5 infection was observed in 4.6% of PE patients and 1.8% of topotecan patients. Grade 3/4 anemia developed in 22% of patients who received topotecan. No difference in quality of life between topotecan and observation was observed at any assessment time or for any of the subscale scores. CONCLUSION: Four cycles of PE induction therapy followed by four cycles of topotecan improved PFS but failed to improve overall survival or quality of life in extensive-stage SCLC. Four cycles of standard PE remains an appropriate first-line treatment for extensive-stage SCLC patients with good performance status.


2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 431-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Vincent Rajkumar ◽  
Emily Blood ◽  
David Vesole ◽  
Rafael Fonseca ◽  
Philip R. Greipp

Purpose To determine if thalidomide plus dexamethasone yields superior response rates compared with dexamethasone alone as induction therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to receive thalidomide plus dexamethasone or dexamethasone alone. Patients in arm A received thalidomide 200 mg orally for 4 weeks; dexamethasone was administered at a dose of 40 mg orally on days 1 to 4, 9 to 12, and 17 to 20. Cycles were repeated every 4 weeks. Patients in arm B received dexamethasone alone at the same schedule as in arm A. Results Two hundred seven patients were enrolled: 103 were randomly assigned to thalidomide plus dexamethasone and 104 were randomly assigned to dexamethasone alone; eight patients were ineligible. The response rate with thalidomide plus dexamethasone was significantly higher than with dexamethasone alone (63% v 41%, respectively; P = .0017). The response rate allowing for use of serum monoclonal protein levels when a measurable urine monoclonal protein was unavailable at follow-up was 72% v 50%, respectively. The incidence rates of grade 3 or higher deep vein thrombosis (DVT), rash, bradycardia, neuropathy, and any grade 4 to 5 toxicity in the first 4 months were significantly higher with thalidomide plus dexamethasone compared with dexamethasone alone (45% v 21%, respectively; P < .001). DVT was more frequent in arm A than in arm B (17% v 3%); grade 3 or higher peripheral neuropathy was also more frequent (7% v 4%, respectively). Conclusion Thalidomide plus dexamethasone demonstrates significantly superior response rates in newly diagnosed myeloma compared with dexamethasone alone. However, this must be balanced against the greater toxicity seen with the combination.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document