8 results on '"Mateos, Maria-Victoria"'
Search Results
2. Melflufen for the treatment of multiple myeloma.
- Author
-
Ocio EM, Nadeem O, Schjesvold F, Gay F, Touzeau C, Dimopoulos MA, Richardson PG, and Mateos MV
- Subjects
- Animals, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols, Dexamethasone therapeutic use, Europe, Phenylalanine analogs & derivatives, Melphalan analogs & derivatives, Melphalan pharmacology, Melphalan therapeutic use, Multiple Myeloma chemically induced, Multiple Myeloma drug therapy, Multiple Myeloma pathology
- Abstract
Introduction: Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen) is a first-in-class peptide-drug conjugate that takes advantage of increased aminopeptidase activity inside tumor cells to rapidly release alkylating agents therein. Melflufen in combination with dexamethasone has been evaluated in multiple clinical trials in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM)., Areas Covered: This profile covers the unique mechanism of action of melflufen, the preclinical results supporting its activity in cellular models of resistance to chemotherapy, its activity in animal models of MM, and the clinical pharmacokinetics of melflufen. Findings from clinical trials evaluating melflufen, including the pivotal phase II HORIZON study and the phase III OCEAN study, are discussed., Expert Opinion: Although MM treatment has improved, patients with disease refractory to multiple standard-of-care drug classes face a dismal prognosis. Melflufen demonstrated efficacy and tolerability in select populations, with an initial approval in the United States in patients with ≥ four previous lines of therapy and triple-class-refractory MM. Results from the phase III OCEAN study - currently under discussion with regulatory agencies in the United States and Europe - are more complex and have been put into context herein. Lastly, melflufen provides a proof-of-concept for the utility of the peptide-drug conjugate platform in relapsed/refractory MM.
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Recommendations for vaccination in multiple myeloma: a consensus of the European Myeloma Network.
- Author
-
Ludwig H, Boccadoro M, Moreau P, San-Miguel J, Cavo M, Pawlyn C, Zweegman S, Facon T, Driessen C, Hajek R, Dimopoulos MA, Gay F, Avet-Loiseau H, Terpos E, Zojer N, Mohty M, Mateos MV, Einsele H, Delforge M, Caers J, Weisel K, Jackson G, Garderet L, Engelhardt M, van de Donk N, Leleu X, Goldschmidt H, Beksac M, Nijhof I, Abildgaard N, Bringhen S, and Sonneveld P
- Subjects
- Clinical Trials as Topic, Consensus, Europe, Humans, Immunosuppressive Agents administration & dosage, Immunosuppressive Agents adverse effects, Immunosuppressive Agents therapeutic use, Multiple Myeloma immunology, Multiple Myeloma therapy, Communicable Disease Control, Communicable Diseases etiology, Multiple Myeloma complications, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Vaccination, Vaccines administration & dosage
- Abstract
Vaccination is one of the most successful medical interventions that has saved the life of millions of people. Vaccination is particularly important in patients with multiple myeloma, who have an increased risk of infections due to the disease-inherent immune suppression, and because of the immune suppressive effects of therapy. Hence, all appropriate measures should be exploited, to elicit an effective immune response to common pathogens like influenza, pneumococci, varicella zoster virus, and to those bacteria and viruses (haemophilus influenzae, meningococci, and hepatitis) that frequently may pose a significant risk to patients with multiple myeloma. Patients after autologous, and specifically after allogeneic transplantation have severely reduced antibody titers, and therefore require a broader spectrum of vaccinations. Response to vaccination in myeloma often is less vigorous than in the general population, mandating either measurement of the postvaccination antibody titers and/or repeating the vaccination. Here, we compile the existing data on vaccination in multiple myeloma and provide recommendations for clinical practice.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. Management of patients with multiple myeloma in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: a consensus paper from the European Myeloma Network (EMN).
- Author
-
Terpos E, Engelhardt M, Cook G, Gay F, Mateos MV, Ntanasis-Stathopoulos I, van de Donk NWCJ, Avet-Loiseau H, Hajek R, Vangsted AJ, Ludwig H, Zweegman S, Moreau P, Einsele H, Boccadoro M, San Miguel J, Dimopoulos MA, and Sonneveld P
- Subjects
- COVID-19, Coronavirus Infections epidemiology, Coronavirus Infections transmission, Coronavirus Infections virology, Disease Management, Europe epidemiology, Humans, Multiple Myeloma virology, Pneumonia, Viral epidemiology, Pneumonia, Viral transmission, Pneumonia, Viral virology, SARS-CoV-2, Betacoronavirus isolation & purification, Coronavirus Infections prevention & control, Infection Control methods, Multiple Myeloma therapy, Pandemics prevention & control, Pneumonia, Viral prevention & control, Practice Guidelines as Topic standards, Telemedicine, Time-to-Treatment statistics & numerical data
- Abstract
Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) seem to be at increased risk for more severe COVID-19 infection and associated complications due to their immunocompromised state, the older age and comorbidities. The European Myeloma Network has provided an expert consensus statement in order to guide therapeutic decisions in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic. Patient education for personal hygiene and social distancing measures, along with treatment individualization, telemedicine and continuous surveillance for early diagnosis of COVID-19 are essential. In countries or local communities where COVID-19 infection is widely spread, MM patients should have a PCR test of nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 before hospital admission, starting a new treatment line, cell apheresis or ASCT in order to avoid ward or community spread and infections. Oral agent-based regimens should be considered, especially for the elderly and frail patients with standard risk disease, whereas de-intensified regimens for dexamethasone, bortezomib, carfilzomib and daratumumab should be used based on patient risk and response. Treatment initiation should not be postponed for patients with end organ damage, myeloma emergencies and aggressive relapses. Autologous (and especially allogeneic) transplantation should be delayed and extended induction should be administered, especially in standard risk patients and those with adequate MM response to induction. Watchful waiting should be considered for standard risk relapsed patients with low tumor burden, and slow biochemical relapses. The conduction of clinical trials should continue with appropriate adaptations to the current circumstances. Patients with MM and symptomatic COVID-19 disease should interrupt anti-myeloma treatment until recovery. For patients with positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, but with no symptoms for COVID-19, a 14-day quarantine should be considered if myeloma-related events allow the delay of treatment. The need for surveillance for drug interactions due to polypharmacy is highlighted. The participation in international COVID-19 cancer registries is greatly encouraged.
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. Overall survival with daratumumab, bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (ALCYONE): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.
- Author
-
Mateos MV, Cavo M, Blade J, Dimopoulos MA, Suzuki K, Jakubowiak A, Knop S, Doyen C, Lucio P, Nagy Z, Pour L, Cook M, Grosicki S, Crepaldi A, Liberati AM, Campbell P, Shelekhova T, Yoon SS, Iosava G, Fujisaki T, Garg M, Krevvata M, Chen Y, Wang J, Kudva A, Ukropec J, Wroblewski S, Qi M, Kobos R, and San-Miguel J
- Subjects
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antibodies, Monoclonal adverse effects, Asia, Bortezomib adverse effects, Disease-Free Survival, Drug Administration Schedule, Drug Therapy, Combination adverse effects, Europe, Female, Humans, Maintenance Chemotherapy, Male, Melphalan adverse effects, Middle Aged, Multiple Myeloma mortality, North America, Prednisone adverse effects, South America, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Antibodies, Monoclonal administration & dosage, Bortezomib administration & dosage, Melphalan administration & dosage, Multiple Myeloma drug therapy, Prednisone administration & dosage
- Abstract
Background: Standard-of-care treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma includes combination therapies for patients who are not eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. At the primary analysis for progression-free survival of the phase 3 ALCYONE trial, progression-free survival was significantly longer with daratumumab in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (D-VMP) versus bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) alone in patients with transplant-ineligible, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Here we report updated efficacy and safety results from a prespecified, interim, overall survival analysis of ALCYONE with more than 36 months of follow-up., Methods: ALCYONE was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients between Feb 9, 2015, and July 14, 2016, at 162 sites in 25 countries across North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and were ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation, because of their age (≥65 years) or because of substantial comorbidities. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio and by permuted block randomisation to receive D-VMP or VMP. An interactive web-based randomisation system was used. Randomisation was stratified by International Staging System disease stage, geographical region, and age. There was no masking to treatment assignments. All patients received up to nine 6-week cycles of subcutaneous bortezomib (1·3 mg/m
2 of body surface area on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, and 32 of cycle one and on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 of cycles two through nine), oral melphalan (9 mg/m2 once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle), and oral prednisone (60 mg/m2 once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle). Patients in the D-VMP group also received intravenous daratumumab (16 mg/kg of bodyweight, once weekly during cycle one, once every 3 weeks in cycles two through nine, and once every 4 weeks thereafter as maintenance therapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which has been reported previously. Results presented are from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival. The primary analysis population (including for overall survival) was the intention-to-treat population of all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. The safety population included patients who received any dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02195479., Findings: 706 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (350 to the D-VMP group, 356 to the VMP group). At a median follow-up of 40·1 months (IQR 37·4-43·1), a significant benefit in overall survival was observed for the D-VMP group. The hazard ratio (HR) for death in the D-VMP group compared with the VMP group was 0·60 (95% CI 0·46-0·80; p=0·0003). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the 36-month rate of overall survival was 78·0% (95% CI 73·2-82·0) in the D-VMP group and 67·9% (62·6-72·6) in the VMP group. Progression-free survival, the primary endpoint, remained significantly improved for the D-VMP group (HR 0·42 [0·34-0·51]; p<0·0001). The most frequent adverse events during maintenance daratumumab monotherapy in patients in the D-VMP group were respiratory infections (54 [19%] of 278 patients had upper respiratory tract infections; 42 [15%] had bronchitis, 34 [12%] had viral upper respiratory tract infections), cough (34 [12%]), and diarrhoea (28 [10%])., Interpretation: D-VMP prolonged overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. With more than 3 years of follow-up, the D-VMP group continued to show significant improvement in progression-free survival, with no new safety concerns., Funding: Janssen Research & Development., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
6. Understanding mortality in multiple myeloma: Findings of a European retrospective chart review.
- Author
-
Mohty M, Cavo M, Fink L, Gonzalez-McQuire S, Leleu H, Mateos MV, Raab MS, Schoen P, and Yong K
- Subjects
- Age Factors, Cause of Death, Combined Modality Therapy, Comorbidity, Disease Management, Europe epidemiology, Female, Humans, Male, Multiple Myeloma diagnosis, Multiple Myeloma epidemiology, Multiple Myeloma therapy, Neoplasm Staging, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Population Surveillance, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Symptom Assessment, Multiple Myeloma mortality
- Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to provide real-world data on the characteristics and treatment of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) at the time of death., Methods: The study was a retrospective patient chart review across France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK during 2016, and included patients who had died in the 3 months before the index date., Results: Data from 786 patients were reviewed. At the time of death, 37% of patients were receiving active treatment, 12% were in a treatment-free interval and 51% were receiving only supportive care. Death before and during active first-line treatment was not uncommon (6% and 24% of patients, respectively) but these deaths were often not solely due to disease progression; factors such as renal failure and infection frequently played a role (in 30% and 20% of patients at first-line, respectively). Most deaths at later lines were due to progressive disease. Cox model results suggested that early deaths were associated with advanced disease stage, high-risk cytogenetics and poor response and relapse profiles., Conclusions: These real-world data could be used to help develop strategies for improving survival in patients with MM and to support management tailored to the stage of disease., (© 2019 The Authors European Journal of Haematology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
7. Multiple myeloma: patient outcomes in real-world practice.
- Author
-
Yong K, Delforge M, Driessen C, Fink L, Flinois A, Gonzalez-McQuire S, Safaei R, Karlin L, Mateos MV, Raab MS, Schoen P, and Cavo M
- Subjects
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols adverse effects, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols therapeutic use, Comorbidity, Cross-Sectional Studies, Disease Management, Disease Progression, Europe epidemiology, Female, Health Care Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Multiple Myeloma diagnosis, Multiple Myeloma therapy, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Phenotype, Physicians, Retrospective Studies, Treatment Outcome, Multiple Myeloma epidemiology
- Abstract
With increasing number of therapies available for the treatment of multiple myeloma, it is timely to examine the course of patients' journeys. We investigated patient characteristics, treatment durations and outcomes, and symptom burden across the treatment pathway in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland and the UK. In total, 435 physicians retrospectively reviewed 4997 patient charts. Profiles of patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma during the last 12 months were similar across countries; bone pain was the most common presentation. Median duration of first-line therapy was 6 months, followed by a median treatment-free interval of 10 months; both these decreased with increasing lines of therapy, as did time to progression. Depth of response, as assessed by the treating physician, also decreased with each additional line of therapy: 74% of patients achieved at least a very good partial response at first line, compared with only 11% at fifth line. Deeper responses were associated with longer time to progression, although these were physician-judged. Toxicities and co-morbidities increased with later treatment lines, and were more likely to have led to discontinuation of treatment. These real-world data provide an insight into patient outcomes and treatment decisions being made in clinical practice., (© 2016 The Authors. British Journal of Haematology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
- Published
- 2016
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
8. Bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone compared with melphalan and prednisone in previously untreated multiple myeloma: updated follow-up and impact of subsequent therapy in the phase III VISTA trial.
- Author
-
Mateos MV, Richardson PG, Schlag R, Khuageva NK, Dimopoulos MA, Shpilberg O, Kropff M, Spicka I, Petrucci MT, Palumbo A, Samoilova OS, Dmoszynska A, Abdulkadyrov KM, Schots R, Jiang B, Esseltine DL, Liu K, Cakana A, van de Velde H, and San Miguel JF
- Subjects
- Aged, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols adverse effects, Boronic Acids administration & dosage, Bortezomib, China, Europe, Female, Humans, Israel, Kaplan-Meier Estimate, Male, Melphalan administration & dosage, Multiple Myeloma mortality, Prednisone administration & dosage, Pyrazines administration & dosage, Recurrence, Risk Assessment, Risk Factors, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, United States, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols therapeutic use, Multiple Myeloma drug therapy
- Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to confirm overall survival (OS) and other clinical benefits with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) versus melphalan and prednisone (MP) in the phase III VISTA (Velcade as Initial Standard Therapy in Multiple Myeloma) trial after prolonged follow-up, and evaluate the impact of subsequent therapies., Patients and Methods: Previously untreated symptomatic patients with myeloma ineligible for high-dose therapy received up to nine 6-week cycles of VMP (n = 344) or MP (n = 338)., Results: With a median follow-up of 36.7 months, there was a 35% reduced risk of death with VMP versus MP (hazard ratio, 0.653; P < .001); median OS was not reached with VMP versus 43 months with MP; 3-year OS rates were 68.5% versus 54.0%. Response rates to subsequent thalidomide- (41% v 53%) and lenalidomide-based therapies (59% v 52%) appeared similar after VMP or MP; response rates to subsequent bortezomib-based therapy were 47% versus 59%. Among patients treated with VMP (n = 178) and MP (n = 233), median survival from start of subsequent therapy was 30.2 and 21.9 months, respectively, and there was no difference in survival from salvage among patients who received subsequent bortezomib, thalidomide, or lenalidomide. Rates of adverse events were higher with VMP versus MP during cycles 1 to 4, but similar during cycles 5 to 9. With VMP, 79% of peripheral neuropathy events improved within a median of 1.9 months; 60% completely resolved within a median of 5.7 months., Conclusion: VMP significantly prolongs OS versus MP after lengthy follow-up and extensive subsequent antimyeloma therapy. First-line bortezomib use does not induce more resistant relapse. VMP used upfront appears more beneficial than first treating with conventional agents and saving bortezomib- and other novel agent-based treatment until relapse.
- Published
- 2010
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.