scholarly journals Network Meta-Analysis of Once Weekly Selinexor-Bortezomib-Dexamethasone in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma

Author(s):  
Michael Dolph ◽  
Gabriel Tremblay ◽  
Adrienne M Gilligan ◽  
Hoyee Leong
Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 1090-1090
Author(s):  
Marc Carrier ◽  
Gregoire Le Gal ◽  
Jason Tay ◽  
Cynthia M. Wu ◽  
Agnes Y. Lee

Abstract Abstract 1090 Background: The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) is high in patients treated with thalidomide (T)- and lenalidomide (L)-based regimens containing dexamethasone (D) and/or cytotoxic chemotherapy (C). Consensus guidelines recommend routine thromboprophylaxis but reliable data from randomized controlled trials are lacking. Recent observational studies have suggested that thromboprophylaxis might be efficacious in decreasing the risk of VTE in this population. Purpose: To determine the absolute rates of VTE with and without different thromboprophylactic agents (ASA, warfarin, low-molecular-weight-heparin [LMWH]) in patients with newly diagnosed or previously treated MM receiving T- or L-based regimens. Data Source: A systematic literature search strategy was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials and all EBM Reviews of published studies up to Jan 2010. Results: A total of 66 studies were included in the analyses. Of these, 61 (4264 patients) and 5 (1119 patients) assessed T- and L-based regimens, respectively. Thalidomide-based regimens The rates of VTE (per 100 patient-cycles) in patients with newly diagnosed MM treated with T-based regimens: The rates of VTE (per 100 patient-months) in patients with previously treated MM managed with T-based regimens: Lenalidomide-based regimens The rates of VTE (per 100 patient-cycles) in patients with newly diagnosed MM treated with L-based regimens: The rate VTE (per 100 patient-months) in patients with previously treated MM managed with L-based regimens: None of the studies reported major bleeding events. Limitations: The definition for VTE varied across studies. Most studies did not outline the diagnostic criteria for VTE. Data are not available (NA) for all prophylaxis regimens. Conclusion: Patients with newly diagnosed or previously treated MM receiving T- or L-based regimens are at high risk of VTE. It is uncertain whether thromboprophylaxis provides a clear benefit, especially in those receiving L-based therapy or have previously treated disease. Randomized controlled trials are needed to address this important clinical need. Disclosures: Lee: Eisai: Research Funding; Sanofi Aventis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Leo Pharma: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.


2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 480-494.e23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric M. Maiese ◽  
Claire Ainsworth ◽  
Jean-Gabriel Le Moine ◽  
Outi Ahdesmäki ◽  
Judith Bell ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 26-35
Author(s):  
Michael Dolph ◽  
Gabriel Tremblay ◽  
Adrienne M Gilligan ◽  
Hoyee Leong

Background: Despite the availability of new treatments, multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable cancer with nearly all patients relapsing and undergoing multiple lines of treatment. Performing head-to-head comparisons of all treatment options is not feasible. Thus, network meta-analyses play an important role in allowing health-care decision makers to compare the effectiveness of treatment options. Objectives: A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was developed from studies identified from a systematic literature review (SLR) to evaluate the efficacy of once weekly oral selinexor with once weekly bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone (XVd) relative to other therapies in previously treated MM. Methods: Ovid was systematically searched for phase 2-3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in MM that assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and overall response rates (ORR). Two population subsets were assessed: second-line patients (2L) and third-line or greater patients (3L+). Base case results compared all regimens against twice weekly bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) as the anchored comparator regimen. Results: Forty-seven RCTs met inclusion. For 2L PFS, OS and ORR, XVd had, on average, out of all iterations, the 6th (out of 21), 4th (out of 15), and 5th (out of 20) best result, respectively, versus Vd. For 3L+ PFS, OS and ORR, XVd had the 12th (out of 24), 11th (out of 22), and 8th (out of 25) best result, respectively, versus Vd. There was no statistically significant difference between XVd and other top-ranking therapies for PFS, OS, and ORR in either 2L and 3L+ except for daratumumab/bortezomib/dexamethasone [DVd], which was favorable versus XVd (2L PFS only). Discussion: Results for XVd were more favorable in 2L, having a higher probability of being a top 5 regimen, compared with 3L+ therapies based on the reported clinical trial results. However, in typical clinical practice, most triplet regimens have been modified using weekly bortezomib dosing, raising questions about the actual efficacy of these regimens versus the reported results using twice weekly bortezomib dosing. Conclusions: The addition of XVd, which was designed with once weekly bortezomib dosing, to the treatment landscape for previously treated MM provides a regimen that may potentially be noninferior to the other top 5 regimens in both 2L and 3L+ settings and is associated with less peripheral neuropathy.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Ghulam Rehman Mohyuddin ◽  
Kelly Koehn ◽  
Leyla Shune ◽  
Muhammad Aziz ◽  
Al-Ola Abdallah ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 100 ◽  
pp. 16-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saverio Caini ◽  
Giovanna Masala ◽  
Patrizia Gnagnarella ◽  
Ilaria Ermini ◽  
William Russell-Edu ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (05) ◽  
pp. 391-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyong Yu ◽  
Liangying Gan ◽  
Zhaohui Wang ◽  
Bao Dong ◽  
Xiaohong Chen

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teruhito Takakuwa ◽  
Kensuke Ohta ◽  
Eiji Nakatani ◽  
Tomoki Ito ◽  
Hitomi Kaneko ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document