Once-per-week selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus twice-per-week bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with multiple myeloma (BOSTON): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Selinexor combined with dexamethasone has shown activity in patients with heavily pre-treated multiple myeloma. In a phase 1b/2 study, the combination of oral selinexor with bortezomib (a proteasome inhibitor) and dexamethasone induced high response rates with low rates of peripheral neuropathy, the main dose-limiting toxicity of bortezomib. We aimed to evaluate the clinical benefit of weekly selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus standard bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma. METHODS: This phase 3, randomised, open-label trial was done at 123 sites in 21 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, who had multiple myeloma, and who had previously been treated with one to three lines of therapy, including proteasome inhibitors, were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive selinexor (100 mg once per week), bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 once per week), and dexamethasone (20 mg twice per week), or bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 twice per week for the first 24 weeks and once per week thereafter) and dexamethasone (20 mg four times per week for the first 24 weeks and twice per week thereafter). Randomisation was done using interactive response technology and stratified by previous proteasome inhibitor therapy, lines of treatment, and multiple myeloma stage. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03110562. The trial is ongoing, with 55 patients remaining on randomised therapy as of Feb 20, 2020. FINDINGS: Of 457 patients screened for eligibility, 402 were randomly allocated-195 (49%) to the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 207 (51%) to the bortezomib and dexamethasone group-and the first dose of study medication was given between June 6, 2017, and Feb 5, 2019. Median follow-up durations were 13·2 months [IQR 6·2-19·8] for the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 16·5 months [9·4-19·8] for the bortezomib and dexamethasone group. Median progression-free survival was 13·93 months (95% CI 11·73-not evaluable) with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 9·46 months (8·11-10·78) with bortezomib and dexamethasone (hazard ratio 0·70 [95% CI 0·53-0·93], p=0·0075). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (77 [39%] of 195 patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group vs 35 [17%] of 204 in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group), fatigue (26 [13%] vs two [1%]), anaemia (31 [16%] vs 20 [10%]), and pneumonia (22 [11%] vs 22 [11%]). Peripheral neuropathy of grade 2 or above was less frequent with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (41 [21%] patients) than with bortezomib and dexamethasone (70 [34%] patients; odds ratio 0·50 [95% CI 0·32-0·79], p=0·0013). 47 (24%) patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 62 (30%) in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group died. INTERPRETATION: A once-per-week regimen of selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone is a novel, effective, and convenient treatment option for patients with multiple myeloma who have received one to three previous lines of therapy. FUNDING: Karyopharm Therapeutics.

Trends and Patterns of Top Ten Common Cancers in Eastern India from 2014 to 2021: A Retrospective Hospital-based Cancer Registry Data Update.

Background: India is a vast and diverse country with existing variations in the frequency and distribution of cancers across its various parts. In regions lacking population-based cancer registries (PBCRs) in a vast country like India, hospital-based cancer registry (HBCR) data become an important source of information on the trends and patterns of a region. To determine the numerical trends of cases of the top ten cancer sites reporting to HBCR of a tertiary care cancer center in Bihar from 2014 to 2021. Materials and Methods: The details of all histopathologically confirmed cancer cases registered in the HBCR department of radiation oncology, State Cancer Institute, Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna, India between January 2014 and December 2021 were included in this retrospective observational study. All these cases were grouped site-wise and listed in descending order of the total number of cases reported in each group. Cross-tabulation with age and sex distribution was done. The frequency distribution of the top ten leading cancers for every consecutive calendar year was plotted in line diagrams for time trend analysis. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 20.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.). was used for analysis. Annual percent change (APC) was determined for the number of cases of all ten cancer sites using joinpoint regression analysis (Joinpoint Regression Software, Version 4.0.4-May 2013; Statistical Methodology and Applications Branch, Surveillance Research Program of the US National Cancer Institute; Bethesda, MD, USA). Results: Out of 32,057 total cancer cases registered between Jan 2014 and Dec 2021, 21,848 patients (68.2%) cases constituted the top ten cancers. The top ten cancers among both sexes were cancer gallbladder (n = 4204, 13.1%), head and neck (n = 3395, 10.6%), breast (n = 3392, 10.6%), lung (n = 2069, 6.5%), cervix (n = 2039, 6.4%), hematolymphoid (n = 1930, 6.0%), liver (n = 1572, 4.9%), stomach (n = 1116, 3.5%), ovary (n = 1103, 3.4%), and colon-rectum (n = 1028, 3.2%). Except for cervical and hematolymphoid cancers, the rest all showed a rising trend over consecutive years. Conclusion: Cancer of the gallbladder continues to be among the most common cancers in the region. Focused research in all aspects of this deadly disease is needed. Strengthening of prevention and screening programs for common cancers and upliftment of the existing infrastructure for diagnosis and treatment of cancer in the region are necessitated.

Epidemiological trends of colorectal cancer cases in young population of Eastern India: A retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a disease of the older population in developed countries where the incidence among the young is rising despite the decline in the overall incidence. Contrary to this, in India, which is a low-incidence country for CRCs, the incidence among all age groups including the young is rising. This study aimed at describing the clinico-demographic profile of young CRC cases and the epidemiological trend of the proportion of young cases from 2014 to 2021 in a tertiary cancer center in Eastern India. METHODS: This retrospective observational study was conducted at Department of Radiation Oncology, State Cancer Institute, IGIMS Patna, India a prominent tertiary cancer care center of Bihar. All histopathologically confirmed CRC cases in the 0-39 years age group were considered young and evaluated for the clinical, demographic profile as well as yearly trends in proportion out of total CRC cases. Microsoft Excel (2021) was used for statistical analysis. A P value of 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Young colorectal (less than 40 years) patients constituted a third (n = 344, 33.4%) of total colorectal (n = 1028) cases. The median age among the young CRC cases was 30 years (range: 12 to 39 years). Rectum was the most common subsite noted (n = 255,74.1%) among this group of young patients. The most commonly encountered stage of the disease was III (n = 107, 31.1%) and chemotherapy was the most common treatment offered (n = 153, 44.5%). The proportion of young (0-39 years) CRC cases ranged between 29.4 and 37.4 (mean 33.5 ± 2.77, P value = 0.725) over the calendar years of the study period. CONCLUSION: The proportion of young (<40 years of age) cases out of total CRC cases in our study is higher than that in developed countries. However, the trends of this proportion have been consistent over the study period, i.e., from 2014 to 2021 without any significant change in our hospital-based cancer registry. Rectal cancer affected nearly three out of every four CRC patients in this age group. More advanced disease at presentation emphasizes the need for measures of screening, early diagnosis, and adequate infrastructure for treatment.

Effect of prior treatments on selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in previously treated multiple myeloma.

Therapeutic regimens for previously treated multiple myeloma (MM) may not provide prolonged disease control and are often complicated by significant adverse events, including peripheral neuropathy. In patients with previously treated MM in the Phase 3 BOSTON study, once weekly selinexor, once weekly bortezomib, and 40 mg dexamethasone (XVd) demonstrated a significantly longer median progression-free survival (PFS), higher response rates, deeper responses, a trend to improved survival, and reduced incidence and severity of bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy when compared with standard twice weekly bortezomib and 80 mg dexamethasone (Vd). The pre-specified analyses described here evaluated the influence of the number of prior lines of therapy, prior treatment with lenalidomide, prior proteasome inhibitor (PI) therapy, prior immunomodulatory drug therapy, and prior autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) on the efficacy and safety of XVd compared with Vd. In this 1:1 randomized study, enrolled patients were assigned to receive once weekly oral selinexor (100 mg) with once weekly subcutaneous bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) and 40 mg per week dexamethasone (XVd) versus standard twice weekly bortezomib and 80 mg per week dexamethasone (Vd). XVd significantly improved PFS, overall response rate, time-to-next-treatment, and showed reduced all grade and grade ≥ 2 peripheral neuropathy compared with Vd regardless of prior treatments, but the benefits of XVd over Vd were more pronounced in patients treated earlier in their disease course who had either received only one prior therapy, had never been treated with a PI, or had prior ASCT. Treatment with XVd improved outcomes as compared to Vd regardless of prior therapies as well as manageable and generally reversible adverse events. XVd was associated with clinical benefit and reduced peripheral neuropathy compared to standard Vd in previously treated MM. These results suggest that the once weekly XVd regimen may be optimally administered to patients earlier in their course of disease, as their first bortezomib-containing regimen, and in those relapsing after ASCT.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03110562). Registered 12 April 2017. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03110562 .