Search

In this Policy Review, the Bone Working Group of the International Myeloma Working Group updates its clinical practice recommendations for the management of multiple myeloma-related bone disease. After assessing the available literature and grading recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) method, experts from the working group recommend zoledronic acid as the preferred bone-targeted agent for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, with or without multiple myeloma-related bone disease. Once patients achieve a very good partial response or better, after receiving monthly zoledronic acid for at least 12 months, the treating physician can consider decreasing the frequency of or discontinuing zoledronic acid treatment. Denosumab can also be considered for the treatment of multiple myeloma-related bone disease, particularly in patients with renal impairment. Denosumab might prolong progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who have multiple myeloma-related bone disease and who are eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. Denosumab discontinuation is challenging due to the rebound effect. The Bone Working Group of the International Myeloma Working Group also found cement augmentation to be effective for painful vertebral compression fractures. Radiotherapy is recommended for uncontrolled pain, impeding or symptomatic spinal cord compression, or pathological fractures. Surgery should be used for the prevention and restoration of long-bone pathological fractures, vertebral column instability, and spinal cord compression with bone fragments within the spinal route. © 2021 Elsevier Ltd

In this Policy Review, the Bone Working Group of the International Myeloma Working Group updates its clinical practice recommendations for the management of multiple myeloma-related bone disease. After assessing the available literature and grading recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) method, experts from the working group recommend zoledronic acid as the preferred bone-targeted agent for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, with or without multiple myeloma-related bone disease. Once patients achieve a very good partial response or better, after receiving monthly zoledronic acid for at least 12 months, the treating physician can consider decreasing the frequency of or discontinuing zoledronic acid treatment. Denosumab can also be considered for the treatment of multiple myeloma-related bone disease, particularly in patients with renal impairment. Denosumab might prolong progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who have multiple myeloma-related bone disease and who are eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. Denosumab discontinuation is challenging due to the rebound effect. The Bone Working Group of the International Myeloma Working Group also found cement augmentation to be effective for painful vertebral compression fractures. Radiotherapy is recommended for uncontrolled pain, impeding or symptomatic spinal cord compression, or pathological fractures. Surgery should be used for the prevention and restoration of long-bone pathological fractures, vertebral column instability, and spinal cord compression with bone fragments within the spinal route.

An exploratory end point from a recent trial in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma showed that median progression-free survival (PFS) was increased by 10.7 months with denosumab vs zoledronic acid. We performed additional analyses to identify factors that may have contributed to the favorable PFS with denosumab. Ad hoc analyses were performed for patients intending to undergo autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT; ASCT intent), not intending to undergo ASCT (ASCT no intent), and intent-to-treat according to age (,70 or $70 years) and baseline renal function (#60 mL/min or .60 mL/min creatinine clearance [CrCl]). Of 1718 patients, 930 (54.1%) were in the ASCT-intent subgroup, and 788 (45.9%) were in the ASCT-no-intent subgroup. In the ASCT-intent subgroup, frontline triplet (median PFS, not estimable vs 35.7 months; hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval (CI)], 0.65 [0.47-0.90]; descriptive P 5 .009) or bortezomib-only (median PFS, not estimable vs not estimable; HR [95% CI], 0.61 [0.39-0.95]; descriptive P 5 .029) induction regimens demonstrated the strongest PFS benefit favoring denosumab vs zoledronic acid. In the ASCT-no-intent subgroup, no benefit with denosumab vs zoledronic acid was observed. PFS favored denosumab vs zoledronic acid in patients with CrCl .60 mL/min and in patients,70 years old, but no difference was observed in patients with CrCl #60 mL/min or patients $70 years old. The PFS difference observed with denosumab is one of the notable benefits reported in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and was most pronounced in patients intending to undergo ASCT and those who received proteasome inhibitor (PI)2based triplet regimens. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01345019. © 2021 by The American Society of Hematology

This Policy Review presents the International Myeloma Working Group's clinical practice recommendations for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Based on the results of phase 2 and phase 3 trials, these recommendations are proposed for the treatment of patients with relapsed and refractory disease who have received one previous line of therapy, and for patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who have received two or more previous lines of therapy. These recommendations integrate the issue of drug access in both low-income and middle-income countries and in high-income countries to help guide real-world practice and thus improve patient outcomes. © 2021 Elsevier Ltd

Combination of carfilzomib with dexamethasone (Kd) is approved for use in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), with carfilzomib administered twice weekly at 56 mg/m2 (Kd56 BIW) or once weekly at 70 mg/m2 (Kd70 QW). Post hoc cross-trial comparisons were performed to compare efficacy and safety profiles of Kd70 QW vs Kd56 BIW dosing schedules using data from three trials of patients with RRMM: A.R.R.O.W., CHAMPION-1, and ENDEAVOR. To select for comparable patient populations, side-by-side efficacy and safety comparisons were performed in subgroups of patients with 2-3 prior lines of therapy who were not refractory to bortezomib. The overall response rate (ORR) was 69.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 61.7-77.2) for Kd70 QW and 72.4% (95% CI, 65.9-78.2) for Kd56 BIW. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.1 months (95% CI, 8.4-14.3) for Kd70 QW and 14.5 months (95% CI, 10.2—not evaluable) for Kd56 BIW. Frequency of grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) was 67.6% for Kd70 QW and 85.3% for Kd56 BIW. Regression analyses (adjusting for prognostic factors) of all patients in the trials who received Kd70 QW vs Kd56 BIW estimated a PFS hazard ratio of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.69-1.19; P =.47) and an ORR odds ratio of 1.12 (95% CI, 0.74-1.69; P =.61). These results suggest that Kd70 QW has a comparable efficacy profile compared with Kd56 BIW and represents a convenient and well-tolerated treatment for patients with RRMM. © 2020 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.