scholarly journals Three Drug Combinations in the Treatment of Fit Elderly Multiple Myeloma Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 3554
Author(s):  
Hélène Gardeney ◽  
Arthur Bobin ◽  
Cécile Gruchet ◽  
Florence Sabirou ◽  
Anthony Lévy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Depth Of Response ◽  
Frail Patients ◽  
Genomic Risk ◽  
Risk Of Treatment

The multiple myeloma (MM) non transplant eligible (NTE) population is growing in line with the aging of the population in Western countries. Historically, this population has been known for having a greater risk of treatment related toxicity, and therefore drug development was slow and rather oriented towards the improvement of safety profile than the optimization of disease control. However, NTE MM patients, at least for the fit/non frail patients in recent years, seemed to have benefited more from a less palliative care to improve the depth of response and then prolong survival. NTE MM being a quite heterogeneous population, there are still a number of groups of patients that are in need of more efficient therapy, avoiding unnecessary toxicity, particularly for the frail patients. The use of triplet regimen with a melphalan-prednisone (MP) backbone has long been the standard of care for NTE MM, often dedicated to non-frail patients. New standards of care, triplet, and even quadruplet combinations, are emerging on the basis of the MP backbone but also on the more recently approved lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd) backbone. These developments were largely possible in line with the development of antibody-based immunotherapies (IT) in MM. The objective to improve outcomes with an acceptable safety profile will see other key therapeutic developments such as the dropping of dexamethasone early in the disease course or various attempts to allow permanent treatment discontinuation with a prolonged disease control. In that context, it is possible that immunomonitoring, minimal residual disease (MRD), and genomic risk-adaptation will become key elements of the treatment decisions on triplet-based regimens.

ECOG-ACRIN EAA172: Phase 1/2 study of daratumumab, bortezomib, dexamethasone (DVd) with or without venetoclax in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) with assessment for t(11;14) status.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS8052-TPS8052 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Thompson ◽  
Susanna J. Jacobus ◽  
Shaji Kumar ◽  
Murali Janakiram ◽  
Sagar Lonial ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Decision Algorithm ◽  
Acceptable Safety Profile ◽  
Multi Agent

TPS8052 Background: The most common translocation in multiple myeloma (MM) is t(11;14)(q13;q32), present in approximately 20% of cases. MM cells with t(11;14) usually have a favorable high BCL-2 level and inferior outcomes compared to standard risk MM. Venetoclax (VEN) is a potent, selective, orally available small-molecule BCL-2 inhibitor that induces cell death in MM cell lines and primary samples. VEN has single agent activity in relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) with an acceptable safety profile, especially in t(11;14) MM; however, non- t(11;14) MM patients may benefit from single agent VEN and VEN incorporated in multi-agent RRMM regimens. Dexamethasone (d) promotes Bcl-2 dependence in MM resulting in sensitivity to VEN and this combination with bortezomib (Vd-VEN) has an acceptable safety profile with high response rates in heavily pre-treated MM. Combination therapy with daratumumab and bortezomib (DVd) has become a standard of care in RRMM. Our hypotheses are that the addition of VEN will improve upon this standard and be most effective in the t(11;14) positive subset. Methods: Eligibility criteria include RRMM with measurable disease, not bortezomib refractory, platelet count > 100K. t(11;14) is an integral biomarker with status (positive or negative) established at registration. After a Ph1 study to determine the recommended phase 2 VEN dose, patients are randomized to DVd +/- VEN [stratified by prior lines of therapy and R-ISS]. The primary Ph2 objectives are to compare 8-cycle minimal residual disease (MRD) negative rate and to inform the role of t(11;14) as a biomarker. The Ph2 design proposed by Freidlin et al. follows a decision algorithm as outlined in the table below. Simulations were run to establish an optimal sample size given various parameters including biomarker prevalence and power to make appropriate decisions for a Ph3 design. Target Ph2 accrual is 240 patients with a 1/3 positive:2/3 negative t(11;14) split. Clinical trial information: NCT03701321. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals PF630 MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE MONITORING AND DEPTH OF RESPONSE IN MULTIPLE MYELOMA

HemaSphere ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (S1) ◽  
pp. 268
Author(s):  
J. Martinez-Lopez ◽  
S. Wong ◽  
N. Shah ◽  
N. Bahri ◽  
T. Martin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Disease Monitoring ◽  
Depth Of Response ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease Monitoring ◽  
Minimal Residual

ECOG-ACRIN EAA181: Effective quadruplet utilization after treatment evaluation (EQUATE)—a randomized phase 3 trial for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) not intended for early autologous transplantation.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS8052-TPS8052
Author(s):  
Shaji Kumar ◽  
Zihan Wei ◽  
Michael A. Thompson ◽  
Bradley Snyder ◽  
Matthias Weiss ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Induction Therapy ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Intensive Therapy ◽  
Autologous Transplantation ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Operating Characteristics ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Depth Of Response

TPS8052 Background: The monoclonal antibody (MoAb) daratumumab (dara) has been approved for treatment of newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM) in combination with lenalidomide (len) and dexamethasone (DRd) in patients who are not eligible to undergo stem cell transplantation (SCT). Ongoing trials are examining the role of adding bortezomib (Btz) to DRd, but it remains unclear if all patients benefit from a quadruplet regimen. Availability of sensitive assays to detect measurable/minimal residual disease (MRD) in MM and emerging data demonstrating significant prognostic value for attaining MRD negativity, offers an unprecedented opportunity to develop individualized treatment approaches. An important question is to identify who benefits from adding a fourth drug to the MoAb-IMiD triplet, thus individualizing therapy based on depth of response. We hypothesize that prolonged intensive therapy with the addition of Btz for consolidation and maintenance after DRd induction therapy for NDMM will improve survival outcomes with a more pronounced effect when used in MRD positive patients. Methods: Patients with NDMM, R-ISS Stage I or II, who are not eligible to undergo SCT or those willing to defer SCT to first relapse and have not received more than 1 cycle of any NDMM therapy will be enrolled, provided they have measurable disease, adequate organ and marrow function, have received no more than once cycle of therapy for MM and significant peripheral neuropathy or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Importantly, a dominant clone should be identified by lymphotrack assay for future MRD monitoring. Once enrolled, induction therapy will be in 28 day cycles consisting of daraSC (1800 mg) weekly for 2 cycles, every other week for cycles 3-6 and then every 4 weeks for 9 cycles, along with len 25 mg days 1-21 of each cycle and dex 40 mg (20 mg for those > 75 years) weekly. At end of 9 cycles (induction), patients will undergo MRD testing by next generation sequencing and will be classified into MRD positive or negative subgroups. Using MRD as an integral biomarker, the trial employs a randomized biomarker-stratified design as proposed by Freidlin et al. to determine efficacy for each MRD subgroup. Patients will be stratified by MRD status and R-ISS stage and randomized to receive 9 cycles of consolidation with DRd, without (control arm) or with (experimental arm) Btz (1.3 mg/m2 weekly for 3 of 4 weeks), followed by DR maintenance until progression The primary endpoint is consolidation OS. Sample size considerations rest on estimates of MRD subgroup prevalence at the end of induction and operating characteristics establishing the treatment effect within the MRD positive subgroup as primary and MRD negative subgroup as key secondary. The total accrual goal is 1450 patients. Clinical trial information: NCT04566328.

Minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma: an important tool in clinical trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Gozzetti ◽  
Monica Bocchia
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
New Drugs ◽  
Next Generation ◽  
Depth Of Response ◽  
Next Generation Sequencing Ngs ◽  
Future Therapy ◽  
Minimal Residual

: Minimal residual disease (MRD) detection represents a great advancement in multiple myeloma. New drugs are now available that increase depth of response. The International Myeloma Working Group recommends the use of next-generation flow cytometry (NGF) or next-generation sequencing (NGS) to search for MRD in clinical trials. Best sensitivity thresholds have to be confirmed, as well as timing to detect it. MRD has proven as the best prognosticator in many trials and promises to enter also in clinical practice to guide future therapy.

Moving Beyond Autologous Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma: Consolidation, Maintenance, Allogeneic Transplant, and Immune Therapy

2016 ◽  
pp. 210-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amrita Krishnan ◽  
Ravi Vij ◽  
Jesse Keller ◽  
Binod Dhakal ◽  
Parameswaran Hari
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
The Other ◽  
Novel Agents ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Hematopoietic Stem ◽  
Minimal Residual

For multiple myeloma, introduction of novel agents as part of the front-line treatment followed by high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) induces deep responses in a majority of patients with this disease. However, disease relapse is inevitable, and, with each relapse, the remission duration becomes shorter, ultimately leading to a refractory disease. Consolidation and maintenance strategy after ASCT is one route to provide sustained disease control and prevent repeated relapses. Though the consolidation strategy remains largely confined to clinical trials, significant data support the efficacy of consolidation in improving the depth of response and outcomes. There are also increasing rates of minimal residual disease–negativity with additional consolidation therapy. On the other hand, maintenance with novel agents post-transplant is well established and has been shown to improve both progression-free and overall survival. Evolving paradigms in maintenance include the use of newer proteasome inhibitors, immunotherapy maintenance, and patient-specific maintenance—a concept that utilizes minimal residual disease as the primary driver of decisions regarding starting or continuing maintenance therapy. The other approach to overcome residual disease is immune therapeutic strategies. The demonstration of myeloma-specific alloimmunity from allogeneic transplantation is well established. More sophisticated and promising immune approaches include adoptive cellular therapies, tumor vaccines, and immune checkpoint manipulations. In the future, personalized minimal residual disease–driven treatment strategies following ASCT will help overcome the residual disease, restore multiple myeloma–specific immunity, and achieve sustained disease control while minimizing the risk of overtreatment.

scholarly journals Evidence-Based Minireview: Should all newly diagnosed MM patients receive CD38 antibody–based treatment?

Hematology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 259-263
Author(s):  
Charlotte L. B. M. Korst ◽  
Niels W. C. J. van de Donk
Keyword(s):  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Depth Of Response ◽  
Cytogenetic Aberrations ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Pretreated Patients

Abstract CD38 antibodies were first evaluated in extensively pretreated patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Currently, there are 3 CD38 antibody–based regimens approved for the treatment of both transplant-eligible (daratumumab plus bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone [D-VTd]) and transplant-ineligible (daratumumab plus lenalidomide-dexamethasone [D-Rd] or daratumumab plus bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone [D-VMP]) patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). The phase 3 studies that evaluated these regimens uniformly showed that the addition of daratumumab to backbone regimens improved the depth of response, which translated into improved progression-free survival and also overall survival in 2 of the studies. Importantly, elderly patients age 75 years or older benefit from these regimens, indicating that these regimens have an acceptable safety profile. Although the number of patients with high-risk cytogenetics was relatively small, these patients also experienced benefit from the addition of daratumumab to standard-of-care regimens, but poor risk conferred by the cytogenetic aberrations is not completely abrogated. Altogether, daratumumab-based regimens have high anti-MM activity and a favorable toxicity profile and therefore represent new standards of care for patients with NDMM.

scholarly journals Depth of Response in Multiple Myeloma: A Pooled Analysis of Three PETHEMA/GEM Clinical Trials

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (25) ◽  
pp. 2900-2910 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan-Jose Lahuerta ◽  
Bruno Paiva ◽  
Maria-Belen Vidriales ◽  
Lourdes Cordón ◽  
Maria-Teresa Cedena ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Bone Marrow Involvement ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response Assessment ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Cox Models ◽  
Depth Of Response ◽  
The Impact

Purpose To perform a critical analysis on the impact of depth of response in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Patients and Methods Data were analyzed from 609 patients who were enrolled in the GEM (Grupo Español de Mieloma) 2000 and GEM2005MENOS65 studies for transplant-eligible MM and the GEM2010MAS65 clinical trial for elderly patients with MM who had minimal residual disease (MRD) assessments 9 months after study enrollment. Median follow-up of the series was 71 months. Results Achievement of complete remission (CR) in the absence of MRD negativity was not associated with prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with near-CR or partial response (median PFS, 27, 27, and 29 months, respectively; median OS, 59, 64, and 65 months, respectively). MRD-negative status was strongly associated with prolonged PFS (median, 63 months; P < .001) and OS (median not reached; P < .001) overall and in subgroups defined by prior transplantation, disease stage, and cytogenetics, with prognostic superiority of MRD negativity versus CR particularly evident in patients with high-risk cytogenetics. Accordingly, Harrell C statistics showed higher discrimination for both PFS and OS in Cox models that included MRD (as opposed to CR) for response assessment. Superior MRD-negative rates after different induction regimens anticipated prolonged PFS. Among 34 MRD-negative patients with MM and a phenotypic pattern of bone marrow involvement similar to monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance at diagnosis, the probability of “operational cure” was high; median PFS was 12 years, and the 10-year OS rate was 94%. Conclusion Our results demonstrate that MRD-negative status surpasses the prognostic value of CR achievement for PFS and OS across the disease spectrum, regardless of the type of treatment or patient risk group. MRD negativity should be considered as one of the most relevant end points for transplant-eligible and elderly fit patients with MM.

DREAMM-9: Phase III study of belantamab mafodotin plus VRd versus VRd alone in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (TI NDMM).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS8556-TPS8556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saad Zafar Usmani ◽  
Evangelos Terpos ◽  
Wojt Janowski ◽  
Hang Quach ◽  
Sarah West ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Open Label

TPS8556 Background: Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is the standard of care for transplant-eligible and TI NDMM, but relapse is usually inevitable. The median progression-free survival (PFS) is ~3 years for patients with TI NDMM, and with each relapse, the duration of response (DoR) diminishes, highlighting the need for novel, effective, targeted agents. Single-agent belantamab mafodotin is a first-in-class B-cell maturation antigen–binding, humanized, afucosylated, monoclonal immunoconjugate, showing deep and durable responses in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma ( Lancet Oncol2020). Preclinical work suggests belantamab mafodotin plus bortezomib or lenalidomide enhances anti-myeloma activity. Therefore, studying clinical activity of belantamab mafodotin in combination with these agents is warranted. Methods: DREAMM-9 (NCT04091126) is a two-part, open-label study to determine efficacy and safety of single-agent belantamab mafodotin with VRd vs. VRd alone in patients with TI NDMM. Patients aged ≥18 years with ECOG status 0–2 and adequate organ system functions will be eligible. Part 1 (dose selection) will evaluate safety/tolerability of belantamab mafodotin with VRd administered by single (Day 1) or split dosing (Days 1 and 8) in ≤5 cohorts (n = 12/cohort): 1.9 mg/kg, 2.5 mg/kg split and single, and 3.4 mg/kg split and single. Six more patients may be added to cohort(s) most likely to be selected as recommended Phase III dose (RP3D). Dose-limiting toxicities and adverse events (AEs) will be assessed, and belantamab mafodotin RP3D determined through modified toxicity probability interval criteria. Part 2 (randomized Phase III) will determine efficacy and safety of belantamab mafodotin at RP3D with VRd vs. VRd alone (n = 750) in two arms randomized 1:1. Dual primary endpoints will be rate of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity and PFS. Secondary endpoints will be response rates (overall response, complete response, very good partial response or better, sustained MRD negativity), DoR, time to progression, and overall survival. Safety assessment will include AEs, serious AEs and ocular findings. In both parts, belantamab mafodotin will be given with VRd for eight induction cycles and then with Rd for maintenance until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline (209664). Drug linker technology licensed from Seattle Genetics; monoclonal antibody produced using POTELLIGENT Technology licensed from BioWa. Clinical trial information: NCT04091126 .

scholarly journals The Prognostic Significance of Minimal Residual Disease Detection after Induction and ASCT to the Patients with Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4956-4956
Author(s):  
Weiqin Yao ◽  
Zhu Mingqing ◽  
Yao Feirong ◽  
Lingzhi Yan ◽  
Song Jin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease ◽  
Induction Therapy ◽  
Plasma Cells ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Prognostic Significance ◽  
Depth Of Response ◽  
Minimal Residual

Abstract Objective: In the last decade the outcome in multiple myeloma in CHINA has greatly improved due to the new, effective therapies including PIs and Imids. But responses to treatment and survival remains heterogeneous because of patient characteristic, disease biology and mechanisms of drug resistance. More and more studies have established the link between depth of response and improved PFS and OS. multiparameter-flow cytometry (MFC) is a main method to detect minimal residual disease(MRD) in myeloma. Sensitivity will be at least at 10-4 to 10-5 by 10-color MFC. Imaging techniques such as PET-CT are important for EMD and bone MRD detection. whole body DWI-MRI is a new imaging technique by mean of the apparent diffusion coefficient(ADC) which can qualify the depth of response to antineoplastic treatment. This study was designed to evaluate the prognostic significance of MRD by 10-color MFC and imaging to the MM patients after induction.Methods: 102 patients with newly diagnosed MM were enrolled at the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University from July 2015 to July 2017. All patients were diagnosed and the response were assessed by IMWG criteria. The median of age was 58 (31-75).There were 46 patients with IgG type , 24 IgA , 14 light chain, 18 others. 34 Patients in ISS stageⅠ,34 in stage Ⅱ, 30 in stage Ⅲ. All patients received 4-6 cycles of triplet bortezomib based or lenalidomide based induction therapy. Transplantation available patients received APBSCT with BUCY condition followed by 4-6 cycles of bortezomib based or lenalidomide based consolidation which were given to transplantation unavailable patients too. Lenalidomide and thalidomide were used for over 2y of maintenance therapy. Bone marrow aspirates for MRD imaging MRD assessment were obtained at the end of induction and 1year after ASCT.The median of follow-up was 13 (2-29) months.Results: According to MRD by MFC and imaging after induction therapy and 1 year after ASCT, the patients were divided into different groups. MFC negativity was 33%(29/88) after induction therapy compared with 63%(32/51) after ASCT (X2=11.636,P=0.001). After induction therapy, the median PFS was 22 months for MRD positive group compared with not reached with MRD negative group by MFC (P=0.042) in patients with very good partial remission(VGPR) and above. The 2 years PFS was 100% for those with MRD negative compared with 60% for MRD positive by imaging. The 2 years PFS was 80% for those have multiclonal normal plasma cells compared with 52.6% for those without. The median PFS was not reached for MFC MRD negative patients 1 year after ASCT compared with 20 months for positive patients. (P=0.002). Multivariate analysis including high risk cytogenetics(17p-, t(4;14), t(14;16)), sex, age, ISS, chemotherapy, ASCT, CR/VGPR, normal PCs showed that the MFC MRD and ASCT were independent prognostic factor.Conclusions: Patients with MFC MRD negative after induction therapy or ASCT is a better prognostic marker than CR or even the best marker. Imaging MRD negativity and the appearance of normal plasma cells in the bone marrow suggests a better prognosis.We will have a try to do more research on overall survival(OS),include longer follow-up and a larger number of patients enrolled. Figure. Figure. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals VD Versus VTD Induction: Similar Efficacy in Controlling Disease in Transplant Eligible Multiple Myeloma Patients Outside Clinical Trials

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 5711-5711
Author(s):  
Federica Cocito ◽  
Silvia Mangiacavalli ◽  
Virginia Valeria Ferretti ◽  
Claudio Salvatore Cartia ◽  
Maya Ganzetti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Similar Efficacy ◽  
Autologous Stem Cell Transplant ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Free Rate

Abstract Autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) remains the standard of care for Multiple Myeloma (MM) patients younger than 70 years old. The role of induction therapy is crucial within a program of high-dose therapy since deeper is the response before, higher is the outcome of transplant. In this study, we analyzed a real life setting of patients treated with three different induction approaches: VAD (Vincristine-Adriamycin-Dexamethasone), VD (Bortezomib - Dexamethasone), and VTD (Bortezomib-Thalidomide-Dexamethasone) in terms of depth of response, 2 years therapy-free rate and toxicity. One hundred and sixty-three MM patients (pts) were included in the analysis: 62 pts treated with VAD (38%), 44 with VD (27%) and 57 with VTD (35%). In VTD group 49 pts (86%) received Bortezomib subcutaneously. As shown in Table 1, patients of the three groups were similar for D&S stage (p 0.59), a higher rate of ISS stage 3 was observed in VAD group (p=0.019), patients in VTD group were significantly older (p=0.024), median follow-up was significantly lower in VTD pts (p<0.001). The overall response rates after induction were similar in all three groups (p=0.156), with higher rate of responses of good quality (CR+VGPR) for patients treated with Bortezomib-based combinations: VAD 24.2%, VD 52.3%, VTD 63.2% (p<0.001). No difference was observed between VTD and VD (p=0.258). A different pattern of responses was observed after transplant, VTD, in fact, was superior to VAD (p<0.001) and VD (p=0.012), while no difference was highlighted between VAD and VD (p=0.352). As a matter of fact, 2 years therapy-free rate were: 48% for patients treated with VAD vs 73% with VD vs 74% with VTD (p=0.189). Of note, however, bortezomib base therapy maintained its superiority with respect to VAD (p=0.03). No differences were observed between VD and VTD regimens in terms of toxicity of any grade and type (52.3% VD vs 52.6% VTD, p> 0.9), and of discontinuation rate (14% in VTD and 18% in VD, p=0.395). The incidence of all grades peripheral neuropathy (PN) was similar between VD and VTD (28.2% and 31.4% p=0.835), but grade 3-4 PN was significantly higher in VD group (no patients in VTD vs 18% in VD pts, p=0.078), probably due to different way of Bortezomib administration in VTD group (86% of pts received subcutaneous Bortezomib). In this study, we confirm that Bortezomib-based regimens are better than VAD in terms of overall response rate, good quality responses and long-term disease control. VTD is superior to VD in terms of good quality responses after transplant but disease control at 2 years is similar. Disclosures Corso: Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document