Search

Purpose: Given the high heterogeneity in survival for patients with multiple myeloma, it would be clinically useful to quantitatively predict the individual survival instead of attributing patients to two to four risk groups as in current models, for example, revised International Staging System (R-ISS), R2-ISS, or Mayo-2022-score., Patients and Methods: Our aim was to develop a quantitative prediction tool for individual patient's 3-/5-year overall survival (OS) probability. We integrated established clinical and molecular risk factors into a comprehensive prognostic model and evaluated and validated its risk discrimination capabilities versus R-ISS, R2-ISS, and Mayo-2022-score., Results: A nomogram for estimating OS probabilities was built on the basis of a Cox regression model. It allows one to translate the individual risk profile of a patient into 3-/5-year OS probabilities by attributing points to each prognostic factor and summing up all points. The nomogram was externally validated regarding discrimination and calibration. There was no obvious bias or overfitting of the prognostic index on the validation cohort. Resampling-based and external evaluation showed good calibration. The c-index of the model was similar on the training (0.76) and validation cohort (0.75) and significantly higher than for the R-ISS ( P < .001) or R2-ISS ( P < .01)., Conclusion: In summary, we developed and validated individual quantitative nomogram-based OS prediction. Continuous risk assessment integrating molecular prognostic factors is superior to R-ISS, R2-ISS, or Mayo-2022-score alone.

Objective: A post hoc subgroup analysis of two phase III trials (NCT00416273, NCT00416208) was carried out to investigate the influence of 100/140 and 200 mg/m² melphalan as well as single/double autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) on progression-free survival (PFS). Additionally, the effect of bortezomib consolidation on PFS was analyzed., Methods: Following induction therapy and high-dose melphalan with subsequent ASCT, patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) were randomized 1:1 to either four 35-day cycles of bortezomib consolidation (1.6 mg/m² IV on days 1, 8, 15, 22) or observation., Results: Of the 340 patients included in this analysis, 13.5% received 1 × MEL100/140, 22.9% 2 × MEL100/140, 31.2% 1 × MEL200, and 32.4% 2 × MEL200. With higher cumulative melphalan dose, PFS improved (P = .0085). PFS curves of patients treated with 2 × MEL100/140 and 1 × MEL200 were very similar. The superior dose effect of MEL200 over MEL100/140 was non-existent in the bortezomib consolidation arm but pronounced in the observation arm (P = .0015). Similarly, double ASCT was only beneficial in patients without bortezomib consolidation (P = .0569)., Conclusions: Full dose melphalan and double transplantation seem advantageous only as long as patients are not receiving bortezomib consolidation afterwards., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Lenalidomide (LEN) maintenance (MT) post autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is standard of care in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) but has not been compared to other agents in clinical trials. We retrospectively compared bortezomib (BTZ; n = 138) or LEN (n = 183) MT from two subsequent GMMG phase III trials. All patients received three cycles of BTZ-based triplet induction and post-ASCT MT. BTZ MT (1.3 mg/m 2 i.v.) was administered every 2 weeks for 2 years. LEN MT included two consolidation cycles (25 mg p.o., days 1-21 of 28 day cycles) followed by 10-15 mg/day for 2 years. The BTZ cohort more frequently received tandem ASCT (91% vs. 33%) due to different tandem ASCT strategies. In the LEN and BTZ cohort, 43% and 46% of patients completed 2 years of MT as intended (p = 0.57). Progression-free survival (PFS; HR = 0.83, p = 0.18) and overall survival (OS; HR = 0.70, p = 0.15) did not differ significantly with LEN vs. BTZ MT. Patients with

Background: Venetoclax is a highly selective, potent, oral BCL-2 inhibitor, which induces apoptosis in multiple myeloma cells. Venetoclax plus bortezomib and dexamethasone has shown encouraging clinical efficacy with acceptable safety and tolerability in a phase 1 trial. The aim of this study was to evaluate venetoclax plus bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma., Methods: In this randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial, patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, who had received one to three previous therapies were enrolled from 90 hospitals in 16 countries. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) centrally using an interactive response technology system and a block size of three to receive venetoclax (800 mg per day orally) or placebo with bortezomib (1·3 mg/m 2 subcutaneously or intravenously and dexamethasone (20 mg orally). Treatment was given in 21-day cycles for the first eight cycles and 35-day cycles from the ninth cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient withdrawal. Randomisation was stratified by previous exposure to a proteasome inhibitor and the number of previous therapies. Sponsors, investigators, study site personnel, and patients were masked to the treatment allocation throughout the study. The primary endpoint was independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02755597., Findings: Between July 19, 2016, and Oct 31, 2017, 291 patients were randomly assigned to receive venetoclax (n=194) or placebo (n=97). With a median follow-up of 18·7 months (IQR 16·6-21·0), median progression-free survival according to independent review committee was 22·4 months (95% CI 15·3-not estimable) with venetoclax versus 11·5 months (9·6-15·0) with placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·63 [95% CI 0·44-0·90]; p=0·010). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (35 [18%] of 193 patients in the venetoclax group vs seven [7%] of 96 patients in the placebo group), pneumonia (30 [16%] vs nine [9%]), thrombocytopenia (28 [15%] vs 29 [30%]), anaemia (28 [15%] vs 14 [15%]), and diarrhoea (28 [15%] vs 11 [11%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 93 (48%) patients in the venetoclax group and 48 (50%) patients in the placebo group, with eight (4%) treatment-emergent fatal infections reported in the venetoclax group and none reported in the placebo group. Three deaths in the venetoclax group (two from pneumonia and one from septic shock) were considered treatment-related; no deaths in the placebo group were treatment-related., Interpretation: The primary endpoint was met with a significant improvement in independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival with venetoclax versus placebo plus bortezomib and dexamethasone. However, increased mortality was seen in the venetoclax group, mostly because of an increased rate of infections, highlighting the importance of appropriate selection of patients for this treatment option., Funding: AbbVie and Genentech., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: A post hoc analysis of two phase III trials was carried out to explore the influence of age and treatment factors on the effect of bortezomib consolidation on progression-free survival (PFS) post autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT)., Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were assigned to one of two trials (ClinicalTrials.gov IDs: NCT00416273, NCT00416208), which were conducted in parallel, based on age (18-60 or 61-75 years, respectively). Following induction and ASCT, patients were randomized 1:1 to four 35-day cycles of bortezomib consolidation (1.6 mg/m 2 IV on days 1, 8, 15, 22) or observation only., Results: Median PFS with bortezomib consolidation vs observation was 33.6 vs 29.0 months (P = 0.3599) in patients aged 18-60 years (n = 202), and 33.4 vs 26.4 months (P = 0.0073) in patients aged 61-75 years (n = 155), respectively. Bortezomib consolidation post-ASCT appeared to equalize outcomes between older and younger patients who received prior treatment of differing intensity. This suggests that the effect of consolidation may be relative and may depend on the composition and intensity of induction and high-dose therapy., Conclusion: Older patients receiving less intensive prior treatment could experience a larger PFS benefit from bortezomib consolidation., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Despite major advances in therapy, multiple myeloma is still an incurable malignancy in the majority of patients. To increase survival, deeper remissions (i.e. CR) translating into longer PFS need to be achieved. Incorporation of new drugs (i.e. bortezomib and lenalidomide) as induction and maintenance treatment in an intensified treatment concept, including high dose melphalan (200 mg/m 2 ), has resulted in increased CR rates, and is considered the standard of care for younger patients. Elotuzumab in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone has given better results as lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone in a phase III trial. The GMMG-HD6 trial will be the first phase III trial investigating the role of elotuzumab in combination with bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRD) induction/consolidation and lenalidomide maintenance within a high dose concept., Methods: GMMG-HD6 is a randomized, open, multicenter phase III trial. The planned recruitment number is 564 NDMM patients. All patients will receive 4 VRD cycles as induction and undergo peripheral blood stem cell mobilization and harvesting. Thereafter they will be treated with high dose melphalan therapy plus autologous stem cell transplantation followed by 2 cycles of VRD consolidation and lenalidomide maintenance. Patients in arm B1 + B2 will additionally receive elotuzumab in the induction phase, whereas patients in A2 + B2 will be treated with elotuzumab added to consolidation and maintenance. The primary endpoint of the trial is PFS. Secondary objectives and endpoints are OS, CR rates after induction therapy comparing the two arms VRD (A1 + A2) vs VRD + elotuzumab (B1 + B2), CR rates after consolidation treatment, best response to treatment during the study, time to progression (TTP), duration of response (DOR), toxicity and quality of life., Results: Since this is the publication of a study protocol of an ongoing study, no results can be presented., Discussion: This phase III trial is designed to evaluate whether the addition of elotuzumab to an intensified treatment concept with high dose melphalan chemotherapy plus autologous stem cell transplantation and induction, consolidation and maintenance treatment with bortezomib and lenalidomide is able to improve PFS compared to the same concept without elotuzumab., Trial Registration: NCT02495922 on June 24th, 2015.

We investigated the impact of subcutaneous versus intravenous bortezomib in the MM5 trial of the German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group which compared bortezomib, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone induction therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Based on data from relapsed myeloma, the route of administration for bortezomib was changed from intravenous to subcutaneous after 314 of 604 patients had been enrolled. We analyzed 598 patients who received at least one dose of trial medication. Adverse events were reported more frequently in patients treated with intravenous bortezomib (intravenous=65%; subcutaneous=56%, P=0.02). Rates of grade 2 or more peripheral neuropathy were higher in patients treated with intravenous bortezomib during the third cycle (intravenous=8%; subcutaneous=2%, P=0.001). Overall response rates were similar in patients treated intravenously or subcutaneously. The presence of International Staging System stage III disease, renal impairment or adverse cytogenetic abnormalities did not have a negative impact on overall response rates in either group. To our knowledge this is the largest study to present data comparing subcutaneous with intravenous bortezomib in newly diagnosed myeloma. We show better tolerance and similar overall response rates for subcutaneous compared to intravenous bortezomib. The clinical trial is registered at eudract.ema.europa.eu as n. 2010-019173-16., (Copyright© Ferrata Storti Foundation.)

Simple Summary: Impaired kidney function is a common complication of a certain blood cancer called multiple myeloma. Patients with severe kidney problems are usually left out of medical studies, so data on safety and efficacy of treatments are limited for these patients. The academic phase II GMMG-DANTE trial (NCT02977494) investigated a combination of drugs—daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone—in patients who had already tried other treatments before, and had severe kidney impairment. Even though the study had to end early, the results were promising. About 67% of the patients had their cancer respond to the treatment, and their kidney function improved. The treatment was overall well tolerated. Renal function impairment (RI) is a common complication in multiple myeloma (MM). However, limited data exist on the safety and efficacy of anti-MM regimens in patients with severe RI, as these patients are frequently excluded from clinical trials. This investigator-initiated multicentric phase II GMMG-DANTE trial evaluated daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (DVd) in relapsed or refractory (r/r) MM patients with severe RI. r/rMM patients with ≥1 prior treatment line and a GFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 or undergoing hemodialysis were eligible and received eight cycles of DVd followed by daratumumab maintenance. The trial closed prematurely after 22/36 planned patients. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Median age of patients was 70 (range 55–89) years, with a median GFR of 20.1 mL/min/1.73 m2 (interquartile range, 9.4–27.3 mL/min/1.73 m2), and eight patients under hemodialysis. Median number of prior lines was two (range 1–10). The trial was successful, albeit with premature termination, as it met its primary endpoint, with an ORR of 67% (14/21). The rates of partial response, very good partial response, and complete response were 29%, 29%, and 10%, respectively (n = 6, 6, and 2). Fourteen patients (67%) achieved renal response. After median follow-up of 28 months, median progression-free survival was 10.4 months; median overall survival was not reached. Higher-grade toxicity was mainly hematologic, and non-hematologic toxicities ≥Grade 3 were mostly infections (24%). The prospective GMMG-DANTE trial investigating DVd exclusively in r/rMM patients with severe RI showed efficacy and safety to be comparable to data from patients without RI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Panobinostat in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone demonstrated a significant and clinically meaningful progression-free survival benefit compared with placebo, bortezomib and dexamethasone in the phase 3 PANORAMA 1 (Panobinostat Oral in Multiple Myeloma 1) trial. Despite this benefit, patients in the panobinostat arm experienced higher rates of adverse events ( AEs) and higher rates of discontinuation due to AEs. This PANORAMA 1 subanalysis examined AEs between 2 treatment phases of the study ( TP1 and TP2), in which administration frequency of bortezomib and dexamethasone differed per protocol. The incidences of several key AEs were lower in both arms following the planned reduction of bortezomib dosing frequency in TP2. In the panobinostat arm, rates of thrombocytopenia (grade 3/4: TP1, 56·7%; TP2, 6·0%), diarrhoea (grade 3/4: TP1, 24·1%; TP2, 7·1%), and fatigue (grade 3/4: TP1, 16·3%; TP2, 1·8%) were lower in TP2 compared with TP1. Dose intensity analysis of panobinostat and bortezomib by cycle in the panobinostat arm showed reductions of both agent doses during cycles 1-4 due to dose adjustments for AEs. Exposure-adjusted analysis demonstrated a reduction in thrombocytopenia frequency in TP1 following dose adjustment. These results suggest that optimization of dosing with this regimen could improve tolerability, potentially leading to improved patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A phase 2 trial was performed to study the combination of bortezomib (VELCADE®) with intermediate-dose dexamethasone (DEX), and continuous low-dose oral cyclophosphamide (CY) in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). Fifty-four patients with advanced MM were enroled to receive eight 3-week treatment cycles with bortezomib 1·3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11, followed by three 5-week cycles with bortezomib 1·3 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. Within all cycles, DEX 20 mg/d was given orally on the day of bortezomib injection and the day thereafter. In addition, patients received CY continuous oral treatment at a dose of 50 mg/d p.o. once daily. Fifty patients completing at least one treatment cycle were evaluable for response. Complete, partial, and minor responses occurred in 16%, 66% and 8% of patients, respectively; overall response rate 90% (efficacy analysis). Median event-free survival was 12 months, with a median overall survival of 22 months. Adverse events (AE) of grades 3 or 4 occurring in at least 10% of patients comprised leucopenia, infection, herpes zoster, thrombocytopenia, neuropathy and fatigue. Bortezomib combined with DEX and CY is a highly effective treatment for relapsed MM at an acceptable rate of grade 3/4 AE. Antiviral prophylaxis appears to be mandatory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]