Search

Autologous transplantation is controversial for older patients with multiple myeloma. The role of age-adjusted high-dose melphalan and the impact of induction chemotherapy cycles is still unclear. A total of 434 patients aged 60-70 years were randomly assigned to 4 cycles of standard anthracycline-based induction chemotherapy or no induction. For all patients, double autologous transplantation after melphalan 140 mg/m 2 (MEL140) was planned. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Of 420 eligible patients, 85% received a first transplant and 69% completed double transplantation. Treatment duration was short with a median of 7.7 months with induction chemotherapy cycles and 4.6 months without induction. On an intention-to-treat basis, median progression-free survival with induction chemotherapy cycles (207 patients) was 21.4 months versus 20.0 months with no induction cycles (213 patients) (hazard ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.84-1.28; P=0.36). Per protocol, progression-free survival was 23.7 months versus 23.0 months (P=0.28). Patients aged 65 years or over (55%) did not have an inferior outcome. Patients with low-risk cytogenetics [absence of del17p13, t(4;14) and 1q21 gains] showed a favorable overall survival and included the patients with sustained first remission. MEL140 was associated with a low rate of severe mucositis (10%) and treatment-related deaths (1%). Based on hazard ratio, the short treatment arm consisting of mobilization chemotherapy and tandem MEL140 achieved 96% of the progression-free survival, demonstrating its value as an independent component of therapy in older patients with multiple myeloma who are considered fit for autologous transplantation. (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 02288741)., (Copyright© Ferrata Storti Foundation.)

Background: The aim of this study was to determine the value of upfront autologous transplantation (ASCT) in elderly patients (60-79 years) with myeloma., Methods: We analysed relative survival (RS) of patients diagnosed in 1998-2011 and treated with ASCT within 12 months after diagnosis in Germany (n = 3591; German Registry of Stem Cell Transplantation) and compare RS with survival of myeloma patients diagnosed in the same years in Germany (n = 13,903; population-based German Cancer Registries)., Results: Utilisation of ASCT has increased rapidly between 2000-2002 and 2009-2011 (60-64years: 7.0-43.0%; 65-69 years: 6.6-23.7%; 70-79 years: 0.4-4.0%). Comparison of 5-year RS of patients from the general German myeloma population who have survived the first year after diagnosis with 5-year RS of patients treated with ASCT revealed higher survival for transplanted patients among all age groups (60-64: 59.2% versus 66.1%; 65-69: 57.4% versus 61.7%; 70-79: 51.0% versus 56.6%). RS increased strongly between 2003-2005 and 2009-2011 for the general German myeloma population (+8.5%) and for patients treated with ASCT (+11.8%). Differences in RS between these groups increased over time from +1.9% higher age-standardised survival in transplanted patients in 2003-2005 to 5.2% higher survival in 2009-2011., Conclusion: We conclude that upfront ASCT might be a major contributor to improved survival for elderly myeloma patients in Germany., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In patients with multiple myeloma (MM), risk stratification by chromosomal abnormalities may enable a more rational selection of therapeutic approaches. In the present study, we analyzed the prognostic value of 12 chromosomal abnormalities in a series of 354 MM patients treated within the HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 trial. Because of the 2-arm design of the study, we were able to analyze the effect of a bortezomib-based treatment before and after autologous stem cell transplantation (arm B) compared with standard treatment without bortezomib (arm A). For allanalyzed chromosomal aberrations, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were at least equal or superior in the bortezomib arm compared with the standard arm. Strikingly, patients with del(17p13) benefited the most from the bortezomib-containing treatment: the median PFS in arm A was 12.0 months and in arm B it was 26.2 months (P = .024); the 3 year-OS for arm A was 17% and for arm B it was 69% (P = .028). After multivariate analysis, del(17p13) was an independent predictor for PFS (P < .0001) and OS (P < .0001) in arm A, whereas no statistically significant effect on PFS (P = .28) or OS (P = .12) was seen in arm B. In conclusion, the adverse impact of del(17p13) on PFS and OS could be significantly reduced by bortezomib-based treatment, suggesting that long-term administration of bortezomib should be recommended for patients carrying del(17p13).

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. Better survival prediction in multiple myeloma—multimodal and continuous nomogram (instead of few arbitrary groups) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Immunotherapeutic targets in multiple myeloma (MM) have variable expression height and are partly expressed in subfractions of patients only. With increasing numbers of available compounds, strategies for appropriate choice of targets (combinations) are warranted. Simultaneously, risk assessment is advisable as patient’s life expectancy varies between months and decades. Methods: We first assess feasibility of RNA-sequencing in a multicenter trial (GMMG-MM5, n=604 patients). Next, we use a clinical routine cohort of untreated symptomatic myeloma patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (n=535, median follow-up (FU) 64 months) to perform RNAsequencing, gene expression profiling (GEP), and iFISH by ten-probe panel on CD138-purified malignant plasma cells. We subsequently compare target expression to plasma cell precursors, MGUS (n=59), asymptomatic (n=142) and relapsed (n=69) myeloma patients, myeloma cell lines (n=26), and between longitudinal samples (MM vs. relapsed MM). Data are validated using the independent MMRF CoMMpass-cohort (n=767, FU 31 months). Results: RNA-sequencing is feasible in 90.8% of patients (GMMG-MM5). Actionable immune-oncological targets (n=19) can be divided in those expressed in all normal and >99% of MM-patients (CD38, SLAMF7, BCMA, GPRC5D, FCRH5, TACI, CD74, CD44, CD37, CD79B), those with expression loss in subfractions of MM-patients (BAFF-R [81.3%], CD19 [57.9%], CD20 [82.8%],CD22 [28.4%]), aberrantly expressed in MM (NY-ESO1/2 [12%], MUC1 [12.7%], CD30 [4.9%], mutated BRAF V600E/K [2.1%]), and resistance-conveying targetmutations e.g., against part but not all BCMA-directed treatments. Risk is assessable regarding proliferation, translated GEP- (UAMS70-, SKY92-, RSscore) and de novo (LfM-HRS) defined risk scores. LfM-HRS delineates three groups of 40%, 38%, and 22% of patients with 5-year and 12-year survival rates of 84% (49%), 67% (18%), and 32% (0%). R-ISS and RNA-sequencing identify partially overlapping patient populations, with R-ISS missing, e.g., 30% (22/72) of highly proliferative myeloma. Conclusion: RNA-sequencing based assessment of risk and targets for first choice treatment is possible in clinical routine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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/m2 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

Evidence on volume outcome associations for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in multiple myeloma (MM) is limited. We investigated ASCT utilization patterns and volume outcome associations in the German National Registry for Stem Cell Transplants (DRST). MM patients with an upfront ASCT between 1998 and 2014 registered in the DRST were included. ASCT utilization increased strongly from 6% to 17% between 1999 and 2013 with the largest increase for patients aged 60–64 years (8–34%). The mean number of ASCTs conducted in the hospitals per year varied (quintiles, Q1:0.0–8.2 to Q5:31.0–102.7). Center volume was not associated with survival after upfront ASCT (lowest vs. highest center volume, hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals: 0.95 (0.76–1.18), p = 0.92). Our findings may reflect a high standard of care and degree of specialization of centers performing ASCT for MM in Germany. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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/m2 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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/m2), 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Infectious complications occur in 60–100% of patients following high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), and are commonly caused by Gram-negative aerobic bacteria (such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa and enterobacteriaceae) and Gram-positive cocci (such as enterococci, streptococci and staphylococci), which should be covered by empiric first-line antibiotic therapy. Less frequently, infections are caused by fungi and anaerobic bacteria, and initial therapy does not necessarily have to cover coagulase-negative staphylococci, oxacillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), anaerobic bacteria and fungi. Patients who already receive antibiotics and develop pulmonary infiltrates should immediately be treated with systemic antifungals. Patients with fever and diarrhea or other signs and symptoms of gastrointestinal or perianal infection should be treated with antibiotics covering anaerobic bacteria and enterococci. Clinically stable patients with skin infections or central venous catheter-related infections can be treated with standard empiric antibiotic therapy including a beta-lactam active against Pseudomonas aeruginosa with or without an aminoglycoside, and should only receive glycopeptides if they do not respond to first-line therapy within 72 hours, become clinically unstable, have severe mucositis, or when resistance against the empiric antibiotics is demonstrated. Recombinant hematopoietic growth factors should not be added routinely but may be considered in life-threatening situations such as invasive pulmonary mycoses or sepsis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]