Search

Summary: Weekly ixazomib with lenalidomide‐dexamethasone (Rd) is feasible and has shown activity in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. This phase 1/2 study (NCT01383928) evaluated the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy of twice‐weekly ixazomib plus Rd in NDMM; 64 patients were enrolled across both phases. Patients received twice‐weekly oral ixazomib 3·0 or 3·7 mg plus lenalidomide 25 mg and dexamethasone 20 mg (10 mg in cycles 9–16) for up to sixteen 21‐day cycles, followed by maintenance with twice‐weekly ixazomib alone. No dose‐limiting toxicities were reported in cycle 1; the RP2D was 3·0 mg based on overall tolerability across multiple cycles. In 62 evaluable patients, the confirmed overall response rate was 94% (68% ≥very good partial response; 24% complete response). Median progression‐free survival was 24·9 months. Responses (median duration 36·9 months for patients receiving the RP2D) deepened during treatment. Grade 3 drug‐related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 64% of patients, including: rash, 13%; peripheral neuropathy, 8%; hyperglycaemia, 8%. There were no grade 4 drug‐related AEs. Thirteen patients discontinued due to AEs. Twice‐weekly ixazomib‐Rd offers substantial activity with promising long‐term outcomes in NDMM patients but may be associated with greater toxicity compared with weekly ixazomib‐Rd in this setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present the case of a woman with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) who received combination lenalidomide and bortezomib therapy for 90 cycles followed by continuous lenalidomide monotherapy and has completed over 100 cycles of treatment to date. The patient was diagnosed with advanced-stage, symptomatic MM in 2001. Following a partial response (PR) to dexamethasone in combination with pamidronate and thalidomide, the patient underwent protocol-directed non-myeloablative allogeneic bone marrow transplantation from her matched sibling donor the following year. In 2004, the patient relapsed and was enrolled in a phase I, dose-escalation trial of lenalidomide plus bortezomib for relapsed and refractory MM. After eight cycles of study treatment, the patient achieved a minimal response. The patient received a total of 90 cycles of treatment with lenalidomide 5 mg given for 14 d every 21 d, and 1 mg/m2 of bortezomib initially given on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 for the first 20 cycles, and then weekly thereafter on days 1 and 8. Bortezomib was discontinued after 90 cycles, and the patient continued to receive lenalidomide monotherapy. As of cycle 100, the patient achieved a PR. Currently, she is clinically stable with response sustained for over 7 yrs. Therapy has been well tolerated with no significant long-term toxicity; no dose reductions of lenalidomide and bortezomib were required. The excellent tolerability of this steroid-free approach and the durable response seen underscore the potential benefits of participating in early-phase clinical trials evaluating novel therapies and new drug combinations. This case further supports that combination treatment with lenalidomide and bortezomib is an effective therapy in the management of patients with relapsed and refractory MM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The frequency, characteristics and reversibility of bortezomib-associated peripheral neuropathy were evaluated in the phase III APEX (Assessment of Proteasome Inhibition for Extending Remissions) trial in patients with relapsed myeloma, and the impact of a dose-modification guideline on peripheral neuropathy severity and reversibility was assessed. Patients received bortezomib 1·3 mg/m2 (days 1, 4, 8, 11, eight 21-d cycles, then days 1, 8, 15, 22, three 35-d cycles); bortezomib was held, dose-reduced or discontinued depending on peripheral neuropathy severity, according to a protocol-specified dose-modification guideline. Overall, 124/331 patients (37%) had treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy, including 30 (9%) with grade ≥3; incidence and severity were not affected by age, number/type of prior therapies, baseline glycosylated haemoglobin level, or diabetes history. Grade ≥3 incidence appeared lower versus phase II trials (13%) that did not specifically provide dose-modification guidelines. Of patients with grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy, 58/91 (64%) experienced improvement or resolution to baseline at a median of 110 d, including 49/72 (68%) who had dose modification versus 9/19 (47%) who did not. Efficacy did not appear adversely affected by dose modification for grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy. Bortezomib-associated peripheral neuropathy is manageable and reversible in most patients with relapsed myeloma. Dose modification using a specific guideline improves peripheral neuropathy management without adversely affecting outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Due in part to racial disparities and underrepresentation in clinical studies, optimal therapies for Black patients with multiple myeloma remain undefined. This final analysis of GRIFFIN by race showed that the addition of daratumumab (D) to lenalidomide/bortezomib/dexamethasone (RVd) provides clinical benefit among both Black and White transplant‐eligible newly diagnosed patients compared with RVd alone. However, Black patients were more likely to discontinue ≥1 drug due to treatment‐emergent adverse events. In summary, these findings suggest a benefit of D‐RVd front‐line therapy among Black and White patients and underscore the importance of equitable treatment access for all patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To analyze the impact of prior therapies on outcomes with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (SVd) versus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in 402 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the phase 3 BOSTON trial. Methods: Post hoc analysis of progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety for lenalidomide‐refractory, proteasome inhibitor (PI)‐naïve, bortezomib‐naïve, and one prior line of therapy (1LOT) patient subgroups. Results: At a median follow‐up of over 28 months, clinically meaningful improvements in PFS were noted across all groups with SVd. The median SVd PFS was longer in all subgroups (lenalidomide‐refractory: 10.2 vs. 7.1 months, PI‐naïve: 29.5 vs. 9.7; bortezomib‐naïve: 29.5 vs. 9.7; 1LOT: 21.0 vs. 10.7; p <.05). The lenalidomide‐refractory subgroup had longer OS with SVd (26.7 vs. 18.6 months; HR 0.53; p =.015). In all subgroups, overall response and ≥very good partial response rates were higher with SVd. The manageable safety profile of SVd was similar to the overall patient population. Conclusions: With over 2 years of follow‐up, these clinically meaningful outcomes further support the use of SVd in patients who are lenalidomide‐refractory, PI‐naïve, bortezomib‐naïve, or who received 1LOT (including a monoclonal antibody) and underscore the observed synergy between selinexor and bortezomib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of maintenance therapy with the oral proteasome inhibitor ixazomib in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) not undergoing transplantation. Methods: Data were pooled from four NDMM phase I/II studies; patients received induction therapy with once‐ or twice‐weekly ixazomib plus lenalidomide‐dexamethasone (IRd), melphalan‐prednisone (IMP), or cyclophosphamide‐dexamethasone (ICd), followed by single‐agent ixazomib maintenance, given at the last tolerated dose during induction, until disease progression, death, or unacceptable toxicity. Results: A total of 121 patients achieved stable disease or better after induction (weekly IRd, n = 25; twice‐weekly IRd, n = 18; weekly or twice‐weekly IMP, n = 35; weekly ICd, n = 43) and received ≥ 1 dose of ixazomib maintenance. Grade ≥ 3 drug‐related adverse events occurred in 24% of patients during maintenance; each event was reported in ≤2% of patients. Rates of complete response were 22% after induction and 35% after maintenance. A total of 28 patients (23%) improved their response during maintenance. Conclusions: Ixazomib maintenance following ixazomib‐based induction is associated with deepening of responses and a positive safety profile with no cumulative toxicity in patients with NDMM not undergoing transplantation, suggesting that ixazomib is feasible for long‐term administration. Phase III investigation of ixazomib maintenance is ongoing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This subgroup analysis of the phase III APEX (Assessment of Proteasome Inhibition for Extending Remissions) trial examined whether prior exposure to specific therapies affected the relative efficacy of bortezomib versus dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory myeloma. Time to progression and overall survival were superior with bortezomib in all subgroups, with no evidence of interaction between any prior therapies and assignment to study therapy. Patients with prior thalidomide exposure had worse outcomes overall, but neither prior thalidomide nor prior autologous stem cell transplantation affected the relative efficacy of bortezomib versus dexamethasone. These results confirm the superiority of bortezomib over dexamethasone, regardless of prior exposure to specific therapies (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00048230). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]