scholarly journals Choosing the Right Therapy for Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM) in Consideration of Patient-, Disease- and Treatment-Related Factors

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (17) ◽  
pp. 4320
Author(s):  
Laura Gengenbach ◽  
Giulia Graziani ◽  
Heike Reinhardt ◽  
Amelie Rösner ◽  
Magdalena Braun ◽  
...  

Treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is more complex today due to the availability of novel therapeutic options, mostly applied as combination regimens. immunotherapy options have especially increased substantially, likewise the understanding that patient-, disease- and treatment-related factors should be considered at all stages of the disease. RRMM is based on definitions of the international myeloma working group (IMWG) and includes biochemical progression, such as paraprotein increase, or symptomatic relapse with CRAB criteria (hypercalcemia, renal impairment, anemia, bone lesions). When choosing RRMM-treatment, the biochemical markers for progression and severity of the disease, dynamic of disease relapse, type and number of prior therapy lines, including toxicity and underlying health status, need to be considered, and shared decision making should be pursued. Objectively characterizing health status via geriatric assessment (GA) at each multiple myeloma (MM) treatment decision point has been shown to be a better estimate than via age and comorbidities alone. The well-established national comprehensive cancer network, IMWG, European myeloma network and other national treatment algorithms consider these issues. Ideally, GA-based clinical trials should be supported in the future to choose wisely and efficaciously from available intervention and treatment options in often-older MM adults in order to further improve morbidity and mortality.

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522199553
Author(s):  
Joshua Richter ◽  
Vamshi Ruthwik Anupindi ◽  
Jason Yeaw ◽  
Suneel Kudaravalli ◽  
Stojan Zavisic ◽  
...  

Introduction Real-world evidence on later line treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is sparse. We evaluated clinical outcomes among RRMM patients in the 1-year following treatment with pomalidomide or daratumumab and compared economic outcomes between RRMM patients and non-MM patients. Patient and Methods Adult patients with ≥1 claim of pomalidomide or daratumumab were identified between January 2012 and February 2018 using IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus US claims database. Patients were required to have a diagnosis or treatment for MM and a claim of any immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors before the index date. Mean time to new therapy, overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier curve and adverse events (AEs) were reported over the 1-year post-index period. RRMM patients were also matched to a non-MM comparator cohort and economic outcomes were compared between the two cohorts. Results 289 RRMM patients were matched to 1,445 patients without MM. Most prevalent hematological AE was anemia (72.0%) and non-hematological AE was infections (75.4%). Mean (SD) time to a new treatment was 4.7 (5.3) months and median OS was 14.6 months. RRMM patients had significantly higher hospitalizations and physician office visits (Both P < .0001) compared to non-MM patients. Adjusting for baseline characteristics, patients with RRMM had 4.9 times (95% CI 3.8-6.4, P < .0001) the total healthcare costs compared with patients without MM. The major driver of total costs among RRMM patients was pharmacy costs (67.3%). Conclusion RRMM patients showed a high frequency of AEs, low OS, and a substantial economic burden suggesting need for effective treatment options.


Hematology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 248-258
Author(s):  
Niels W. C. J. van de Donk

Abstract In multiple myeloma (MM), treatment selection and sequencing become increasingly complex with the increasing number of therapeutic options, including antibodies. Choice of treatment is dependent on various factors including patient- and tumor-related features. In addition, treatment-related factors, such as type and response to prior therapy, are also critical in terms of the selection of a new treatment regimen. Furthermore, approval status and reimbursement policies influence treatment choice. At the time of first relapse, patients who received a bortezomib-based regimen can switch to lenalidomide-based treatment, whereas patients who received lenalidomide until progression can switch to a proteasome inhibitor–based therapy. Alternatively, there is increasing evidence that pomalidomide-based triplets are also effective following the development of lenalidomide-refractory disease both in early and later relapse settings. Patients who become refractory to immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, and CD38 antibodies have a poor prognosis. These triple-class refractory patients may benefit from novel, recently approved agents such as XPO1 inhibitors or from participation in a clinical trial. Furthermore, retreatment with agents that were received in previous lines of therapy can also be considered in heavily pretreated patients, for example, in combination with classic cytotoxic drugs. Importantly, with the increasing use of CD38 antibodies in newly diagnosed and early relapsed/refractory MM, more information is needed on the potential value of retreatment with CD38 antibodies. With the introduction of new immunotherapies with novel modes of action, we also need a better understanding of sequencing of immunotherapeutic agents by taking into account the effect of prior therapy on immune function.


Hematology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 508-517 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pieter Sonneveld

Abstract The approach to the patient with relapsed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma requires a careful evaluation of the results of previous treatments, the toxicities associated with it, and an assessment of prognostic factors. The majority of patients will have received prior therapy with drug combinations, including a proteasome inhibitor and an immune-modulatory agent. It is the physician’s task to choose the right moment for the start of therapy and decide with the patient which goals need to be achieved. The choice of regimen is usually based on prior response, drugs already received, adverse effects, comorbidities of the patient, and expected efficacy and tolerability. Many double and triple drug combinations are available. In addition, promising new drugs such as pomalidomide, carfilzomib, and monoclonal antibodies are or will be available shortly, and other options can be explored in clinical trials. Finally, supportive care and palliative options need to be considered in later relapsed disease. Increasingly, it becomes important to consider the therapeutic options for the whole duration of the disease and integrate a systematic approach for the patient.


Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 3556-3556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Chen ◽  
Donna E. Reece ◽  
David Siegel ◽  
Ruben Niesvizky ◽  
Ralph Vincent Boccia ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) in combination with dexamethasone was approved in the US on June 29, 2006 for the treatment of subjects with multiple myeloma who had received at least one prior therapy. On February 28, 2005 based upon a positive interim analysis of two pivotal placebo-controlled Phase III studies, an independent Data Safety Monitoring Board recommended the studies be unblinded and all subjects in both studies be given access to lenalidomide. In April 2005, the FDA in association with myeloma patient advocacy groups requested Celgene establish an expanded access program to make lenalidomide plus dexamethasone available to subjects with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma while the treatment was awaiting approval. Aim: To provide lenalidomide to multiple myeloma subjects with a high likelihood of benefit and to obtain additional safety data. Methods: Subjects with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma that received at least 1 prior therapy were eligible. Subjects received 25 mg lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone in 4-week cycles until disease progression was documented, study drug was discontinued, or lenalidomide became commercially available for this indication. Results: Between September 8, 2005 and July 25, 2006, approximately 1400 subjects in the US and Canada were enrolled into the study. A data snapshot taken March 17, 2006 demonstrated that 746 subjects had been enrolled, median age was 63 years, 60% were male, and 66.5% had Stage III disease. Median time on study was 7.1 weeks (0.1–24.4) and median daily dose was 20.5 mg. At least one Grade 3 or 4 adverse event was reported in 261 (35%) of the 746 subjects. Most commonly reported Grade 3–4 events were neutropenia (7.9% of subjects), thrombocytopenia (6.0%), fatigue (3.6%), anemia (3.5%), pneumonia (3.1%) and hyperglycemia (2.0%). These most commonly reported Grade 3–4 adverse events were the same as those found in the previous pivotal studies, however, their frequencies of occurrence were lower in the current study probably due to ongoing data collection and differences in study maturity. Likewise, the most commonly reported adverse events (all grades) were the same as those reported in the two previous pivotal studies. Conclusion: Preliminary data from this expanded access program in over 1400 subjects with multiple myeloma are consistent with results from two earlier Phase III pivotal studies. The EAP of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone in multiple myeloma represents a model of how government, advocacy groups, healthcare providers and industry can work together to quickly provide treatment to subjects in need while a clearly active treatment regimen is awaiting approval.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 5032-5032
Author(s):  
Brian G. M. Durie ◽  
Jatin J. Shah ◽  
Rafat Abonour ◽  
Cristina Gasperetto ◽  
Jayesh Mehta ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 5032 Background: In the past decade, with the availability of novel therapies, the paradigm for myeloma management has changed. In 2010 it is especially important to understand baseline features and initial treatment decisions. The goal of the Connect MM® registry is to characterize patients with newly diagnosed active myeloma from 200 US sites. Approximately 80% of the patient population will be enrolled from community-based practices and 20% from academic centers. An electronic case report form was developed to collect clinical data, physician choices, patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and response, as well as data on survival end points. This is a prospective, observational, longitudinal study with a target accrual of 1,500 patients in 3 years, with a 5 year follow-up from the time of informed consent. There are no mandated treatments or clinical assessments. However, there are data collection requirements for diagnosis and disease monitoring. Results: Since late 2009, 340 patients from 135 sites have been accrued and were included in this interim analysis. Current study demographics include: 60% male, 83% white, and 14% black, with a median age of 67 years. Thus far, 97% have been enrolled from community-based practices. All patients met study enrollment criteria and had active myeloma at entry; prior monoclonal gammopathy of unknown significance (MGUS) was reported in 13% and smoldering MM in 8%. International Staging System (ISS) staging for evaluable patients were 26.3%, 36.4%, 37.3% for stages I, II, and III, respectively. Durie-Salmon Stage (A or B) were 13%, 35%, 52% for stages I, II, and III, respectively. Staging procedures included 82% skeletal survey; 44% computed tomography (CT); 40% magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); 7% positron emission tomography (PET); 2% PET/CT; and 4% had no imaging. International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) CRAB criteria were assessed in all enrolled patients; 9% had hypercalcemia, 18% renal insufficiency, 36% anemia, and 66% had bone lesions. Median values were: calcium 9.5 mg/dL; serum creatinine 1.1 mg/dL; hemoglobin 10.9 gm/dL. Only 9% of patients had 3 or 4 CRAB features, while 49% had only 1 feature and 26% were asymptomatic (ECOG=0). The incidence of baseline peripheral neuropathy was 6%. Initial pain led to radiation therapy for 10% of patients, with 16% having vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty. Cytogenetic studies were performed at baseline in 64% of patients and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) studies in 54%. Cytogenetics and FISH were normal in 27% of patients, while in 20% both were abnormal in patients who had both performed. FISH was abnormal with normal cytogenetics in 41% and only 2% had normal FISH but abnormal cytogenetics. The most common FISH abnormalities were: 13 q- (31%), 17 p- (28%), t(4; 14) (16%). Freelite® testing was performed in 56% of patients with an abnormal ratio in 94% [rFLC]. Of evaluable patients receiving frontline therapy 98% of patients received a novel agent and only 3 patients (1.4% of treated patients) received melphalan/prednisone. Two drug combinations were used in 53%, 3 drugs in 26%, 4 drugs in 1.3%, and single agents were used in 21% of the patients. The most common regimens were: bortezomib+dexamethasone (28%), lenalidomide+dexamethasone (20%), and bortezomib+lenalidomide+ dexamethasone (15%). Conclusion: These baseline features and treatment choices characterize myeloma patients primarily in community-based practices in the US in 2010. As academic centers enroll more patients, we will be able to further characterize that population. Of particular note, 26% of patients were asymptomatic at baseline but had biochemical evidence of myeloma and met enrollment criteria; conversely 95% had an abnormal rFLC and 73% had abnormal chromosome results. The Connect MM® registry will provide data regarding patient features as they pertain to patterns in testing and treatment in the clinical practice setting, as well as response and survival outcomes. Disclosures: Durie: Celgene & Millennium: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Revlimid (lenalidomide) in combination with dexamethasone is indicated for the treatment of multiple myeloma patients who have received at least one prior therapy. Shah:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Abonour:Celgene & Millennium: Honoraria. Gasperetto:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Mehta:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda/Millennium: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Research Funding. Pashos:Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Swern:Celgene: Employment. Street:Celgene: Employment. Sullivan:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rifkin:Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Cephalon: Speakers Bureau; Dendreon: Speakers Bureau.


2018 ◽  
Vol 121 ◽  
pp. 74-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon Cook ◽  
Sonja Zweegman ◽  
María-Victoria Mateos ◽  
Florence Suzan ◽  
Philippe Moreau

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (20) ◽  
pp. 5210
Author(s):  
Arthur Bobin ◽  
Cécile Gruchet ◽  
Stéphanie Guidez ◽  
Hélène Gardeney ◽  
Laly Nsiala Makunza ◽  
...  

Novel treatments are needed to address the lack of options for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Even though immunotherapy-based treatments have revolutionized the field in recent years, offering new opportunities for patients, there is still no curative therapy. Thus, non-immunologic agents, which have proven effective for decades, are still central to the treatment of multiple myeloma, especially for advanced disease. Building on their efficacy in myeloma, the development of proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs has been pursued, and has led to the emergence of a novel generation of agents (e.g., carfilzomib, ixazomib, pomalidomide). The use of alkylating agents is decreasing in most treatment regimens, but melflufen, a peptide-conjugated alkylator with a completely new mechanism of action, offers interesting opportunities. Moreover, with the identification of novel targets, new drug classes have entered the myeloma armamentarium, such as XPO1 inhibitors (selinexor), HDAC inhibitors (panobinostat), and anti-BCL-2 agents (venetoclax). New pathways are still being explored, especially the possibility of a mutation-driven strategy, as biomarkers and targeted treatments are increasing. Though multiple myeloma is still considered incurable, the treatment options are expanding and are progressively becoming more diverse, largely because of the continuous development of non-immunologic agents.


2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 109
Author(s):  
Paul G Richardson ◽  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Stephen A Schey ◽  
Meletios A Dimopoulos ◽  
Thierry Facon ◽  
...  

Pomalidomide is a distinct immunomodulatory agent with significant activity in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The optimal treatment schedule in patients with RRMM who have received multiple lines of treatment, including bortezomib and lenalidomide, is 4 mg/day on days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle in combination with weekly low-dose dexamethasone. Improved responses and outcomes relative to traditional therapies continue to be confirmed in recently completed and ongoing trials. Pomalidomide exhibits direct tumoricidal, immunomodulatory, anti-angiogenic and anti-inflammatory activities, which facilitate combination therapy with agents with complementary mechanisms of action, resulting in greater anti-myeloma effects than single-agent therapy or previous combination therapies. For example, in combination with proteasome inhibitors and traditional chemotherapeutic agents in doublet or triplet regimens, pomalidomide provides high rates of durable response, and represents an important new treatment option for patients with RRMM requiring effective new therapies. Additionally, pomalidomide maintains its efficacy and tolerability profile in difficult-to-treat patients, including the elderly, patients with poor cytogenetics and those with renal impairment. This review summarises the clinical development of pomalidomide and discusses this effective agent for the treatment of patients with RRMM in the context of current myeloma treatment options, as well as potential future directions to further improve patient outcomes.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (5) ◽  
pp. 421-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajai Chari ◽  
Joaquín Martinez-Lopez ◽  
María-Victoria Mateos ◽  
Joan Bladé ◽  
Lotfi Benboubker ◽  
...  

Abstract Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) have limited treatment options and poor survival outcomes. The increasing adoption of lenalidomide-based therapy for frontline treatment of multiple myeloma has resulted in a need for effective regimens for lenalidomide-refractory patients. This phase 1b study evaluated daratumumab plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone (D-Kd) in patients with RRMM after 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy, including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory drug; lenalidomide-refractory patients were eligible. Carfilzomib- and daratumumab-naïve patients (n = 85) received carfilzomib weekly on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle (20 mg/m2 initial dose, escalated to 70 mg/m2 thereafter) and dexamethasone (40 mg/wk). Of these, 10 patients received the first daratumumab dose as a single infusion (16 mg/kg, day 1 cycle 1), and 75 patients received a split first dose (8 mg/kg, days 1-2 cycle 1). Subsequent dosing was per the approved schedule for daratumumab. Patients received a median of 2 (range, 1-4) prior lines of therapy; 60% were lenalidomide refractory. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia (31%), lymphopenia (24%), anemia (21%), and neutropenia (21%). Infusion-related reactions were observed in 60% and 43% of single and split first-dose patients, respectively. Overall response rate was 84% (79% in lenalidomide-refractory patients). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached; 12-month PFS rates were 74% for all treated patients and 65% for lenalidomide-refractory patients. D-Kd was well tolerated with low neutropenia rates, and it demonstrated deep responses and encouraging PFS, including in patients refractory to lenalidomide. The trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01998971.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document