Phase III TRIDENT trial: Radiation and temozolomide +/- tumor treating fields in newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS2580-TPS2580
Author(s):  
Wenyin Shi ◽  
Lawrence Kleinberg ◽  
Suriya A. Jeyapalan ◽  
Samuel Aaron Goldlust ◽  
Seema Nagpal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Type I ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Tumor Treating Fields ◽  
Post Surgery

TPS2580 Background: Tumor treating fields (TTFields) is a non-invasive, regional antimitotic treatment approved as a standard of care for glioblastoma (GBM). In the EF-14 phase III trial, TTFields (200 kHz) plus temozolomide (TMZ) significantly increased the survival of patients with newly diagnosed GBM (ndGBM) without increase in systemic toxicity. TTFields-related AEs were mainly skin AEs. In preclinical models, TTFields increase the therapeutic effects of radiation therapy (RT). A pilot study showed that TTFields concomitant with RT and TMZ is well tolerated. The benefit of concomitant TTFields with RT and TMZ will be tested in this phase III TRIDENT randomized trial. Methods: TRIDENT is an international phase III randomized trial comparing standard RT with TMZ vs the triple combination of RT plus TMZ with concomitant TTFields. RT is delivered through the TTFields arrays. Patients in both arms will receive maintenance TTFields with TMZ. TTFields (200 KHz) will be delivered >18 hours/day using Optune. Patients will continue TTFields treatment until second recurrence. Patients with pathologically confirmed newly ndGBM, ≥ 18 years, KPS ≥ 70, either sex, post-surgery or biopsy, who are amenable for RT/TMZ therapy will be enrolled. Patients will be stratified by extent of resection and MGMT promoter methylation status. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS). Secondary end points include: progression free survival (PFS; RANO), 1- and 2-year survival rates, overall radiological response (ORR; RANO), progression-free survival (PFS2, PFS6, PFS12); severity and frequency of AEs (CTCAE V5.0); pathological changes in resected GBM tumors post treatment; quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30); and correlation of OS to TTFields compliance. The hypothesis is that concomitant TTFields with radiation and TMZ will significantly improve OS as compared to radiation and TMZ alone. The sample size is 950, with 475 in each arm to detect a HR <0.8 with a 5% type I error. Survival will be measured from the time of randomization until date of death. At the time of analysis, patients who are lost to follow-up or still on protocol follow-up will be censored at the last date known to be alive.

scholarly journals ES-2 Phase 3 TRIDENT Trial: Radiation and Temozolomide with or without Tumor Treating Fields in newly diagnosed glioblastoma

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. ii3-ii3
Author(s):  
Mitsutoshi Nakada
Keyword(s):  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Type I ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Tumor Treating Fields ◽  
Post Surgery

Abstract Background: Tumor treating fields (TTFields) is a non-invasive, regional antimitotic treatment approved as a standard-of-care for glioblastoma. In the EF-14 Phase 3 trial, TTFields (200 kHz) plus temozolomide (TMZ) significantly increased survival of patients with newly diagnosed GBM(ndGBM) without increasing systemic toxicity. TTFields-related AEs were mainly skin AEs. In preclinical models, TTFields increase the therapeutic effects of radiation therapy (RT). A pilot study showed that TTFields concomitant with RT and TMZ is well tolerated. The benefit of concomitant TTFields with RT and TMZ will be tested in the TRIDENT trial. Methods: TRIDENT is an international phase III randomized trial comparing standard RT/TMZ vs the triple combination of RT/TMZ with concomitant TTFields. RT is delivered through the TTFields arrays. Patients in both arms will receive maintenance TTFields/TMZ. TTFields (200 kHz) will be delivered over18 hours/day using Optune. Patients will continue TTFields treatment until second recurrence. Patients with pathologically confirmed ndGBM, over 18 years old, KPS over 70, either sex, post-surgery or biopsy, and amenable for RT/TMZ therapy will be stratified by extent of resection and MGMT promoter methylation status. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS). Secondary end points: progression free survival (PFS; RANO), 1- and 2-year survival rates, overall radiological response (ORR; RANO), progression-free survival (PFS2, PFS6, PFS12); severity and frequency of AEs (CTCAE V5.0); pathological changes in resected GBM tumors post treatment; quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30); and correlation of OS to TTFields compliance. The hypothesis is that concomitant TTFields/RT/TMZ will significantly improve OS versus RT/TMZ. Sample size (N=950; 475/arm) will detect a HR lower than 0.8 with 5% type I error. Survival will be measured from the time of randomization until date of death. At the time of analysis, patients lost to follow-up or still on protocol follow-up will be censored at the last date known to be alive.

scholarly journals CTNI-74. PHASE 3 TRIDENT TRIAL: CONCOMITANT RADIATION THERAPY (RT) AND TEMOZOLOMIDE +/- TUMOR TREATING FIELDS (TTFIELDS) IN NEWLY DIAGNOSED GLIOBLASTOMA

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii59-ii60
Author(s):  
Wenyin Shi ◽  
Lawrence Kleinberg ◽  
Suriya A Jeyapalan ◽  
Samuel Goldlust ◽  
Seema Nagpal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Type I ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Tumor Treating Fields ◽  
Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma

Abstract BACKGROUND Tumor treating fields (TTFields) is a non-invasive, regional antimitotic treatment approved as a standard-of-care for newly diagnosed glioblastoma (ndGBM). In the EF-14 Phase 3 trial, TTFields (200 kHz) plus temozolomide (TMZ) significantly increased survival of ndGBM patients without increasing systemic toxicity. TTFields-related AEs were mainly skin AEs. In preclinical models, TTFields increase the therapeutic effects of radiation therapy (RT). A pilot study showed that TTFields concomitant with RT and TMZ is well tolerated. The benefit of concomitant TTFields with RT and TMZ will be tested in the TRIDENT trial. METHODS TRIDENT is an international phase III randomized trial comparing standard RT with TMZ vs the triple combination of RT/TMZ with concomitant TTFields. RT is delivered through the TTFields arrays. Patients in both arms will receive maintenance TTFields/TMZ. TTFields (200 KHz) will be delivered &gt;18 hours/day using Optune. Patients will continue TTFields treatment until second recurrence. Patients with pathologically confirmed ndGBM, ≥ 18 years, KPS ≥ 70, either sex, post-surgery or biopsy, and amenable for RT/TMZ therapy will be stratified by extent of resection and MGMT promoter methylation status. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS). Secondary end points: progression free survival (PFS; RANO), 1- and 2-year survival rates, overall radiological response (ORR; RANO), progression-free survival (PFS6M, PF12M, PFS2Y); severity and frequency of AEs (CTCAE V5.0); pathological changes in resected GBM tumors post treatment; quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30); and correlation of OS to TTFields compliance. The hypothesis is that concomitant TTFields/RT/TMZ will significantly improve OS versus RT/TMZ. Sample size (N=950; 475/arm) will detect a HR&lt; 0.8 with 5% type I error. Survival will be measured from the time of randomization until date of death. At the time of analysis, patients lost to follow-up or still on protocol follow-up will be censored at the last date known to be alive.

scholarly journals Final Results of the IELSG-19 Randomized Trial of Mucosa-Associated Lymphoid Tissue Lymphoma: Improved Event-Free and Progression-Free Survival With Rituximab Plus Chlorambucil Versus Either Chlorambucil or Rituximab Monotherapy

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (17) ◽  
pp. 1905-1912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuele Zucca ◽  
Annarita Conconi ◽  
Giovanni Martinelli ◽  
Reda Bouabdallah ◽  
Alessandra Tucci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Lymphoid Tissue ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Final Sample ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
To Receive

Purpose There is no consensus on the optimal systemic treatment of patients with extranodal marginal zone lymphoma of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue. The IELSG-19 phase III study, to our knowledge, was the first such study to address the question of first-line treatment in a randomized trial. Patients and Methods Eligible patients were initially randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive either chlorambucil monotherapy (6 mg/m2/d orally on weeks 1 to 6, 9 to 10, 13 to 14, 17 to 18, and 21 to 22) or a combination of chlorambucil (same schedule as above) and rituximab (375 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 13, 17, and 21). After the planned enrollment of 252 patients, the protocol was amended to continue with a three-arm design (1:1:6 ratio), with a new arm that included rituximab alone (same schedule as the combination arm) and with a final sample size of 454 patients. The main end point was event-free survival (EFS). Analysis of chlorambucil versus the combination arm was performed and reported separately before any analysis of the third arm. Results At a median follow-up of 7.4 years, addition of rituximab to chlorambucil led to significantly better EFS (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.77). EFS at 5 years was 51% (95% CI, 42 to 60) with chlorambucil alone, 50% (95% CI, 42 to 59) with rituximab alone, and 68% (95% CI, 60 to 76) with the combination ( P = .0009). Progression-free survival was also significantly better with the combination ( P = .0119). Five-year overall survival was approximately 90% in each arm. All treatments were well tolerated. No unexpected toxicities were recorded. Conclusion Rituximab in combination with chlorambucil demonstrated superior efficacy in mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma; however, improvements in EFS and progression-free survival did not translate into longer overall survival.

A Prospective, Randomized, Phase III Study of Bortezomib, Melphalan, Prednisone and Thalidomide (VMPT) Versus Bortezomib, Melphalan and Prednisone (VMP) in Elderly Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Patients

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 652-652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Davide Rossi ◽  
Valeria Magarotto ◽  
Francesco Di Raimondo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Chromosomal Abnormalities ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Gastrointestinal Complications ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Weekly Infusion ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: In newly diagnosed myeloma patients the combination of bortezomib with melphalan-prednisone (VMP) was superior to MP. In relapsed-refractory patients the 4 drug combination of bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (VMPT) induced a high proportion of complete responses (CR). Methods: Newly diagnosed myeloma patients (N=393) older than 65 years, from 58 centers in Italy, were randomly assigned to receive VMPT (N=193) or VMP (N=200). Initially, patients were treated with nine 6-week cycles of VMPT (bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 days 1,4,8,11,22,25,29,32 in cycles 1–4 and days 1,8,22,29 in cycles 5–9; melphalan 9 mg/m2 days 1–4; prednisone 60 mg/m2 days 1–4 and thalidomide 50 mg days 1–42, followed by bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 every 15 days and thalidomide 50 mg/day as maintenance) or VMP (bortezomib, melphalan and prednisone at the same doses and schedules previously described without maintenance). In March 2007, the protocol was amended: both VMPT and VMP schedules were changed to nine 5-week cycles and bortezomib schedule was modified to weekly administration (bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 days 1,8,15,22 in cycles 1–9). Primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Patient characteristics were similar in both groups: median age was 71 years, 23% of patients were aged > 75 years. Patients who received at least 1 cycle were evaluated: 152 patients for VMPT (62 received bortezomib bi-weekly infusion and 90 weekly infusion) and 152 patients for VMP (62 received bortezomib bi-weekly infusion and 90 weekly infusion). Data were analyzed in intention-to-treat. The very good partial response (VGPR) rate was higher in the VMPT group (55% versus 42%, p=0.02), including a CR rate of 31% in the VMPT group and 16% in the VMP group (p=0.003). In the subgroup treated with weekly infusion of bortezomib, VGPR was 59% for VMPT and 37% for VMP (p=0.004), including 28% CR for VMPT and 10% for VMP (p=0.004). Subgroup analyses did not show any statistical difference between responses and either age, B2-microglobulin or chromosomal abnormalities, such as del13, t(4;14), t(14;16) and del17. After a median follow-up of 13.6 months, the 2-year PFS was 83.9% in the VMPT group and 75.7% in the VMP group (HR=0.73, 95% CI 0.38–1.42, p=0.35). In patients who received weekly infusion of bortezomib, the 2-year PFS was 86.8% in the VMPT group and 78.1% in the VMP group (HR=0.65, 95% CI 0.24–1.8, p=0.41). In patients who achieved CR after induction, the 2-year PFS was 100% for VMPT and 79% for VMP (p=0.02). The 3-year overall survival (OS) was 89.5% in the VMPT group and 88.7% in the VMP group (HR=1.02, 95% CI 0.43–2.46, p=0.96). The incidence of grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) was similar in both groups. In the VMPT patients and in the VMP patients, the more frequent AEs were neutropenia (36% vs 31%), thrombocytopenia (20% vs 19%), peripheral neuropathy (18% vs 12%), infections (14% vs 10%), and gastrointestinal complications (7% vs 8%), respectively. The weekly infusion of bortezomib significantly decreased the incidence of grade 3–4 peripheral neuropathy (9% for VMPT and 3% for VMP). Conclusion: VMPT is superior to VMP in terms of response rates. Longer follow-up is needed to assess their effects on PFS and OS. The weekly infusion of bortezomib significantly reduced the incidence of grade 3–4 peripheral neuropathy without influencing outcome. Table. Complete responses, progression-free survival and peripheral neuropathy in all patients and in those who received weekly infusion of bortezomib VMPT group (n=152) VMP group (n=152) All patients (n=152) Subgroup with bortezomib weekly infusion (n=90) All patients (n=152) Subgroup with bortezomib weekly infusion (n=90) CR rate (%) 31 28 16 10 2-year PFS (%) 84 87 76 78 Grade 3–4 peripheral neuropathy (%) 18 9 12 3

scholarly journals P14.79 Randomized phase II trial of Tumor Treating Fields plus radiation therapy plus temozolomide compared to radiation therapy plus temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. iii86-iii86
Author(s):  
D Limon ◽  
F Bokstein ◽  
D Blumenthal ◽  
C Ben Harush ◽  
Z Ram ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Surgical Resection ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Tumor Treating Fields ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii

Abstract BACKGROUND In last decade, there were numerous attempts to improve the outcome of patients with glioblastoma (GBM), but even after maximal surgical resection, radiation therapy (RT) and temozolomide (TMZ), followed by maintenance TMZ for 6 months the median OS is 14.6 months. In the EF-14 Phase III trial, the addition of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) at 200 kHz to maintenance TMZ increased the median OS to 20.9 months, compared with 16.0 months with maintenance TMZ alone (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.53–0.76; p<0.001). Based on these results, the currently accepted standard of care for newly diagnosed GBM (ndGBM) is surgical resection if safely feasible, followed by RT with concomitant TMZ, and then followed by maintenance TMZ in combination with TTFields. Preclinical investigations have shown a radio-sensitizing effect of TTFields on glioma cells, suggesting synergistic effects between TTFields and radiotherapy. In a pilot study of 10 patients with ndGBM, we demonstrated that there was no increased treatment-related toxicity when TTFields were given in combination with RT/TMZ. The only TTFields-related adverse event was skin toxicity below the arrays. Preliminary progression free survival (PFS) data was encouraging. Based on the results of the pilot study, we designed this prospective, randomized Phase II study to further investigate if the addition of TTFields TMZ/RT treatment in ndGBM patients improves treatment efficacy and delays disease progression. MATERIAL AND METHODS Following debulking surgery or biopsy, 60 adult patients (≥18 years) with histologically confirmed GBM, KPS≥70 and life expectancy of at least 3 months will be randomized 1:1 to either a) RT with concomitant TMZ and TTFields (200 kHz) for 6 weeks followed by up to 6 months of maintenance TMZ in combination with TTFields (experimental arm) up to 24 months; or b) RT with concomitant TMZ alone followed by maintenance TMZ in combination with TTFields (control arm). Exclusion criteria: patients with early progressive disease, significant comorbidities precluding maintenance RT or TMZ or patients with an implanted electronic device. The primary endpoint is progression free survival at 12 months (PFS12). Treatment with TTFields will be continued until second progression or 24 months (the earlier of the two). All patients will be followed for survival. Grading and severity of all adverse events will be recorded using CTCAE V5.0. The sample size of 60 patients provides 80% power with a two-sided alpha level of 0.05 to detect a PFS12 of 46.5% with RT/TMZ/TTFields compared to 29.4% with RT/TMZ followed, respectively, by maintenance TMZ/TTFields (calculated from the RT/TMZ followed by maintenance TMZ/TTFields arm of the EF-14 trial). It is forecasted to take 24 months to fully recruit. Follow-up will continue for >12 months from recruitment of the last patient.

A prospective data analysis of targeted therapy combined with concurrent radiation therapy for brain metastasis from NSCLC with driver gene mutation.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14006-e14006
Author(s):  
Xiaotong Duan ◽  
Xiaoxia Zhu ◽  
Lijuan Wang
Keyword(s):  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Gene Mutation ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Driver Gene ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Concurrent Radiotherapy ◽  
Nsclc Patients

e14006 Background: Previous studies have shown that brain metastases of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with positive driver genes have poor prognosis. There is still lack of prospective studies on the efficacy and safety of targeted therapy combined with concurrent radiotherapy for brain metastases(BM). Methods: NSCLC patients, with ECOG score 0-2, having MRI confirmed brain or meningeal metastases were eligible. Patients must have driver gene mutation and received corresponding targeted therapy. The intracranial radiotherapy regimen was SRS or whole brain radiotherapy. The primary objective was iPFS (intracranial progression-free survival); Secondary objectives were: iORR (intracranial objective response rate), PFS (progression-free survival), OS (overall survival). MMSE (Mini Mental State Examination) and FACT-Br was carried out before/after weekly radiotherapy and during systematic treatment. Treatment-related toxicities were assessed according RTOG/EORTC criteria. Tumor responses were evaluated using RECIST V1.1 criteria. Survival analysis was performed using the Graphprism version 6.0 by Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Results: 23 NSCLC with BM was included. Among them, 10 patients were newly diagnosed with NSCLC BM. 2 patients’ BM progressed after targeted therapy. 11 NSCLC patients were newly diagnosed with BM after targeted therapy. 91.3% of patients presented an EGFR mutation, including primarily EGFR 19-exon deletion, EGFR 21-L8585R. 11.5% presented with c-MET mutation. Median age was 58.34 yrs(44-71yrs). Patients were mostly treated with Erolotinib and Gefitinib. All patients were adenocarcinoma. At last follow-up, for patients newly diagnosed with NSCLC BM, 8 patients had achieved intracranial progression, and 7 patients had reached OS, of which 1 died before completing WBRT. The median iPFS was 9.3m(95%CI:0.571-4.055) and the median OS was 11.9m (95%CI:0.2752 -2.732). As for patients who progressed after targeted therapy, one patient’s OS was 4.4m, iPFS of the other patient was 3.9m. Among NSCLC patients who were newly diagnosed with BM after targeted therapy, 8 patients had achieved intracranial progression and 5 patients had reached OS. The median iPFS was 6.13m (95%CI:0.247-1.751) and the mOS was 13.8m (95%CI:0.3660-3.634). Common adverse effects include dry skin, fatigue, dizziness, headache, anorexia, and grade I myelosuppression and no serious adverse events (SAEs); MMSE and FACT-Br scores were no significant differences at baseline and follow-up. Conclusions: In stage IV brain metastatic NSCLC with driver gene mutation, targeted therapy combined with concurrent radiotherapy for BM is tolerable, and there is no significant impact on the quality of life and cognitive function after radiotherapy. The evaluation of efficacy requires further follow-up. Support:LC2019ZD009,81972853 and 81572279.

Efficacy of avelumab plus axitinib (A + Ax) versus sunitinib (S) by number of IMDC risk factors and tumor sites at baseline in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): Extended follow-up results from JAVELIN Renal 101.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 302-302
Author(s):  
Yoshihiko Tomita ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Hideaki Miyake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
To Receive

302 Background: In the phase III JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (NCT02684006), A + Ax demonstrated progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) benefit across IMDC risk groups (favorable, intermediate, and poor) vs S in patients with previously untreated aRCC. Here we report efficacy of A + Ax vs S by number of IMDC risk factors (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4-6) and target tumor sites (1, 2, 3, and ≥4) at baseline from the second interim analysis of overall survival (OS). Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive A 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 wk + Ax 5 mg orally twice daily or S 50 mg orally once daily for 4 wk (6-wk cycle). PFS and ORR per independent central review (RECIST 1.1) and OS were assessed. Results: At data cut-off (Jan 2019), median (m) follow-up for OS and PFS was 19.3 vs 19.2 mo and 16.8 vs 15.2 mo for the A + Ax vs S arm, respectively. The table shows OS, PFS, and ORR by number of IMDC risk factors and target tumor sites at baseline. A + Ax generally demonstrated efficacy benefit vs S across subgroups. Conclusions: With extended follow-up, A + Ax generally demonstrated efficacy benefit vs S across the number of IMDC risk factors and tumor sites at baseline in aRCC. OS was still immature; follow-up for the final analysis is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006 . [Table: see text]

Efficacy of Melphalan and Prednisone Plus Thalidomide in Patients Older Than 75 Years With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: IFM 01/01 Trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (22) ◽  
pp. 3664-3670 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cyrille Hulin ◽  
Thierry Facon ◽  
Philippe Rodon ◽  
Brigitte Pegourie ◽  
Lotfi Benboubker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

Purpose Until recently, melphalan and prednisone were the standards of care in elderly patients with multiple myeloma. The addition of thalidomide to this combination demonstrated a survival benefit for patients age 65 to 75 years. This randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial investigated the efficacy of melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide in patients older than 75 years with newly diagnosed myeloma. Patients and Methods Between April 2002 and December 2006, 232 previously untreated patients with myeloma, age 75 years or older, were enrolled and 229 were randomly assigned to treatment. All patients received melphalan (0.2 mg/kg/d) plus prednisone (2 mg/kg/d) for 12 courses (day 1 to 4) every 6 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg/d of oral thalidomide (n = 113) or placebo (n = 116), continuously for 72 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. Results After a median follow-up of 47.5 months, overall survival was significantly longer in patients who received melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide compared with those who received melphalan and prednisone plus placebo (median, 44.0 v 29.1 months; P = .028). Progression-free survival was significantly prolonged in the melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide group (median, 24.1 v 18.5 months; P = .001). Two adverse events were significantly increased in the melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide group: grade 2 to 4 peripheral neuropathy (20% v 5% in the melphalan and prednisone plus placebo group; P < .001) and grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (23% v 9%; P = .003). Conclusion This trial confirms the superiority of the combination melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide over melphalan and prednisone alone for prolonging survival in very elderly patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Toxicity was acceptable.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document