RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The combination of ibrutinib and venetoclax has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) as compared with chemoimmunotherapy. Whether ibrutinib-venetoclax and personalization of treatment duration according to measurable residual disease (MRD) is more effective than fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-rituximab (FCR) is unclear. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label platform trial involving patients with untreated CLL, we compared ibrutinib-venetoclax and ibrutinib monotherapy with FCR. In the ibrutinib-venetoclax group, after 2 months of ibrutinib, venetoclax was added for up to 6 years of therapy. The duration of ibrutinib-venetoclax therapy was defined by MRD assessed in peripheral blood and bone marrow and was double the time taken to achieve undetectable MRD. The primary end point was progression-free survival in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group as compared with the FCR group, results that are reported here. Key secondary end points were overall survival, response, MRD, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 523 patients were randomly assigned to the ibrutinib-venetoclax group or the FCR group. At a median of 43.7 months, disease progression or death had occurred in 12 patients in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group and 75 patients in the FCR group (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07 to 0.24; P<0.001). Death occurred in 9 patients in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group and 25 patients in the FCR group (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.67). At 3 years, 58.0% of the patients in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group had stopped therapy owing to undetectable MRD. After 5 years of ibrutinib-venetoclax therapy, 65.9% of the patients had undetectable MRD in the bone marrow and 92.7% had undetectable MRD in the peripheral blood. The risk of infection was similar in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group and the FCR group. The percentage of patients with cardiac serious adverse events was higher in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group than in the FCR group (10.7% vs. 0.4%). CONCLUSIONS: MRD-directed ibrutinib-venetoclax improved progression-free survival as compared with FCR, and results for overall survival also favored ibrutinib-venetoclax. (Funded by Cancer Research UK and others; FLAIR ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN01844152; EudraCT number, 2013-001944-76.).
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B , Neoplasia Residual , Vidarabina , Humanos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Compuestos Bicíclicos Heterocíclicos con Puentes/administración & dosificación , Compuestos Bicíclicos Heterocíclicos con Puentes/uso terapéutico , Ciclofosfamida/administración & dosificación , Ciclofosfamida/efectos adversos , Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B/tratamiento farmacológico , Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B/patología , Neoplasia Residual/patología , Rituximab/administración & dosificación , Rituximab/efectos adversos , Sulfonamidas/administración & dosificación , Sulfonamidas/efectos adversos , Factores de Tiempo , Vidarabina/administración & dosificación , Vidarabina/efectos adversos , Vidarabina/análogos & derivados , Duración de la TerapiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The approval of Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) was based on trials which compared ibrutinib with alkylating agents in patients considered unfit for fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab, the most effective chemoimmunotherapy in CLL. We aimed to assess whether ibrutinib and rituximab is superior to fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in terms of progression-free survival. METHODS: This study is an interim analysis of FLAIR, which is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial in patients with previously untreated CLL done at 101 UK National Health Service hospitals. Eligible patients were between 18 and 75 years of age with a WHO performance status of 2 or less and disease status requiring treatment according to International Workshop on CLL criteria. Patients with greater than 20% of their CLL cells having the chromosome 17p deletion were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of minimisation (Binet stage, age, sex, and centre) with a random element in a web-based system to ibrutinib and rituximab (ibrutinib administered orally at 420 mg/day for up to 6 years; rituximab administered intravenously at 375 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and at 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycles 2-6 of a 28-day cycle) or fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (fludarabine 24 mg/m2 per day orally on day 1-5, cyclophosphamide 150 mg/m2 per day orally on days 1-5; rituximab as above for up to 6 cycles). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, analysed by intention to treat. Safety analysis was per protocol. This study is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN01844152, and EudraCT, 2013-001944-76, and recruiting is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 19, 2014, and July 19, 2018, of 1924 patients assessed for eligibility, 771 were randomly assigned with median age 62 years (IQR 56-67), 565 (73%) were male, 206 (27%) were female and 507 (66%) had a WHO performance status of 0. 385 patients were assigned to fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab and 386 patients to ibrutinib and rituximab. After a median follow-up of 53 months (IQR 41-61) and at prespecified interim analysis, median progression-free survival was not reached (NR) with ibrutinib and rituximab and was 67 months (95% CI 63-NR) with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (hazard ratio 0·44 [95% CI 0·32-0·60]; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event was leukopenia (203 [54%] patients in the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab group and 55 [14%] patients in the ibrutinib and rituximab group. Serious adverse events were reported in 205 (53%) of 384 patients receiving ibrutinib and rituximab compared with 203 (54%) of 378 patients receiving fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab. Two deaths in the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab group and three deaths in the ibrutinib and rituximab group were deemed to be probably related to treatment. There were eight sudden unexplained or cardiac deaths in the ibrutinib and rituximab group and two in the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab group. INTERPRETATION: Front line treatment with ibrutinib and rituximab significantly improved progression-free survival compared with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab but did not improve overall survival. A small number of sudden unexplained or cardiac deaths in the ibrutinib and rituximab group were observed largely among patients with existing hypertension or history of cardiac disorder. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and Janssen.
Asunto(s)
Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Rituximab , Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B/tratamiento farmacológico , Medicina Estatal , Ciclofosfamida , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversosRESUMEN
Lenalidomide is an effective maintenance agent for patients with myeloma, prolonging first remission and, in transplant eligible patients, improving overall survival (OS) compared to observation. The 'Myeloma XI' trial, for newly diagnosed patients, aimed to evaluate whether the addition of the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat to the lenalidomide maintenance backbone could improve outcomes further. Patients included in this analysis were randomised to maintenance therapy with lenalidomide alone (10 mg/day on days 1-21 of each 28-day cycle), or in combination with vorinostat (300 mg/day on day 1-7 and 15-21 of each 28-day cycle) with treatment continuing until unacceptable toxicity or progressive disease. There was no significant difference in median progression-free survival between those receiving lenalidomide-vorinostat or lenalidomide alone, 34 and 40 months respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96-1.44, p = 0.109). There was also no significant difference in median OS, not estimable and 75 months respectively (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.76-1.29, p = 0.929). Subgroup analysis demonstrated no statistically significant heterogeneity in outcomes. Combination lenalidomide-vorinostat appeared to be poorly tolerated with more dose modifications, fewer cycles of maintenance therapy delivered and higher rates of discontinuation due to toxicity than lenalidomide alone. The trial did not meet its primary end-point, there was no benefit from the addition of vorinostat to lenalidomide maintenance.
Asunto(s)
Mieloma Múltiple , Humanos , Mieloma Múltiple/terapia , Lenalidomida , Vorinostat , Dexametasona , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversosRESUMEN
The GA101 (obinutuzumab) monocLonal Antibody as Consolidation Therapy In chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) (GALACTIC) was a seamless phase II/III trial designed to test whether consolidation with obinutuzumab is safe and eradicates minimal residual disease (MRD) and, subsequently, whether this leads to prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with CLL who have recently responded to chemo-immunotherapy. Patients with a response 3-24 months after chemotherapy were assessed for MRD. MRD-positive patients were randomised to receive consolidation therapy with obinutuzumab or no consolidation. The trial closed after the phase II part due to slow recruitment. In all, 48 patients enrolled of whom 19 were MRD negative and were monitored. Of the 29 MRD-positive patients, 14 were randomised to receive consolidation and 15 to no consolidation. At 6 months after randomisation, 10 and 13 consolidated patients achieved MRD negativity by flow cytometry (sensitivity 10-4 ) in bone marrow and peripheral blood respectively. PFS was significantly better in consolidated patients compared to non-consolidated patients (p = 0.001). No difference was observed in PFS, overall survival or duration of MRD negativity when comparing the 10 MRD-negative patients after consolidation with the 19 MRD-negative patients in the monitoring group. Common adverse events in the consolidation arm were thrombocytopenia, infection, and cough. Only 1% of events were infusion-related reactions. This observation provides further evidence that consolidation to achieve MRD negativity improves outcomes in CLL and that obinutuzumab is well tolerated in patients with low levels of disease.
Asunto(s)
Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B , Humanos , Academias e Institutos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Factores Inmunológicos/uso terapéutico , Inmunoterapia , Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasia Residual/tratamiento farmacológico , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
Newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients treated with immunomodulatory drugs are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), but data are lacking from large prospective cohorts. We present thrombosis outcome data from Myeloma IX (n = 1936) and Myeloma XI (n = 4358) phase 3 randomized controlled trials for NDMM that treated transplant-eligible and transplant-ineligible patients before and after publication of thrombosis prevention guidelines. In Myeloma IX, transplant-eligible patients randomly assigned to cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone (CVAD) induction had higher risk of VTE compared with patients treated with cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (CTD) (22.5% [n = 121 of 538] vs 16.1% [n = 89 of 554]; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR],1.46; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.11-1.93). For transplant-ineligible patients, those randomly assigned to attenuated CTD (CTDa) induction had a higher risk of VTE compared with those treated with melphalan and prednisolone (MP) (16.0% [n = 68 of 425] vs 4.1% [n = 17 of 419]; aHR, 4.25; 95% CI, 2.50-7.20). In Myeloma XI, there was no difference in risk of VTE (12.2% [n = 124 of 1014] vs 13.2% [n = 133 of 1008]; aHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72-1.18) or arterial thrombosis (1.2% [n = 12 of 1014] vs 1.5% [n = 15 of 1008]; aHR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.37-1.70) between transplant-eligible pathways for patients treated with cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (CRD) or CTD. For transplant-ineligible patients, there was no difference in VTEs between attenuated CRD (CRDa) and CTDa (10.4% [n = 95 of 916] vs 10.7% [n = 97 of 910]; aHR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.73-1.29). However, arterial risk was higher with CRDa than with CTDa (3.1% [n = 28 of 916] vs 1.6% [n = 15 of 910]; aHR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.02-3.57). Thrombotic events occurred almost entirely within 6 months of treatment initiation. Thrombosis was not associated with inferior progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS), apart from inferior OS for patients with arterial events (aHR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.12-2.08) in Myeloma XI. The Myeloma XI trial protocol incorporated International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) thrombosis prevention recommendations and compared with Myeloma IX, more patients received thromboprophylaxis (80.5% vs 22.3%) with lower rates of VTE for identical regimens (CTD, 13.2% vs 16.1%; CTDa, 10.7% vs 16.0%). However, thrombosis remained frequent in spite of IMWG-guided thromboprophylaxis, suggesting that new approaches are needed.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Factores Inmunológicos/efectos adversos , Mieloma Múltiple/complicaciones , Trombofilia/inducido químicamente , Trombosis/etiología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Ciclofosfamida/administración & dosificación , Ciclofosfamida/efectos adversos , Dexametasona/administración & dosificación , Dexametasona/efectos adversos , Doxorrubicina/administración & dosificación , Doxorrubicina/efectos adversos , Femenino , Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas , Humanos , Factores Inmunológicos/uso terapéutico , Incidencia , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Lenalidomida/administración & dosificación , Lenalidomida/efectos adversos , Masculino , Melfalán/administración & dosificación , Melfalán/efectos adversos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mieloma Múltiple/sangre , Mieloma Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiple/terapia , Prednisolona/administración & dosificación , Prednisolona/efectos adversos , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Medición de Riesgo , Talidomida/administración & dosificación , Talidomida/efectos adversos , Trombofilia/tratamiento farmacológico , Trombosis/epidemiología , Trombosis/prevención & control , Trasplante Autólogo , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiología , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiología , Vincristina/administración & dosificación , Vincristina/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Carfilzomib is a second-generation irreversible proteasome inhibitor that is efficacious in the treatment of myeloma and carries less risk of peripheral neuropathy than first-generation proteasome inhibitors, making it more amenable to combination therapy. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The Myeloma XI+ trial recruited patients from 88 sites across the UK between 5 December 2013 and 20 April 2016. Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma eligible for transplantation were randomly assigned to receive the combination carfilzomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone, and cyclophosphamide (KRdc) or a triplet of lenalidomide, dexamethasone, and cyclophosphamide (Rdc) or thalidomide, dexamethasone, and cyclophosphamide (Tdc). All patients were planned to receive an autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) prior to a randomisation between lenalidomide maintenance and observation. Eligible patients were aged over 18 years and had symptomatic myeloma. The co-primary endpoints for the study were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for KRdc versus the Tdc/Rdc control group by intention to treat. PFS, response, and safety outcomes are reported following a planned interim analysis. The trial is registered (ISRCTN49407852) and has completed recruitment. In total, 1,056 patients (median age 61 years, range 33 to 75, 39.1% female) underwent induction randomisation to KRdc (n = 526) or control (Tdc/Rdc, n = 530). After a median follow-up of 34.5 months, KRdc was associated with a significantly longer PFS than the triplet control group (hazard ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.51-0.76). The median PFS for patients receiving KRdc is not yet estimable, versus 36.2 months for the triplet control group (p < 0.001). Improved PFS was consistent across subgroups of patients including those with genetically high-risk disease. At the end of induction, the percentage of patients achieving at least a very good partial response was 82.3% in the KRdc group versus 58.9% in the control group (odds ratio 4.35, 95% CI 3.19-5.94, p < 0.001). Minimal residual disease negativity (cutoff 4 × 10-5 bone marrow leucocytes) was achieved in 55% of patients tested in the KRdc group at the end of induction, increasing to 75% of those tested after ASCT. The most common adverse events were haematological, with a low incidence of cardiac events. The trial continues to follow up patients to the co-primary endpoint of OS and for planned long-term follow-up analysis. Limitations of the study include a lack of blinding to treatment regimen and that the triplet control regimen did not include a proteasome inhibitor for all patients, which would be considered a current standard of care in many parts of the world. CONCLUSIONS: The KRdc combination was well tolerated and was associated with both an increased percentage of patients achieving at least a very good partial response and a significant PFS benefit compared to immunomodulatory-agent-based triplet therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ISRCTN49407852.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Mieloma Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Ciclofosfamida/uso terapéutico , Dexametasona/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Lenalidomida/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mieloma Múltiple/mortalidad , Oligopéptidos/uso terapéutico , Análisis de Supervivencia , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
Predicting patient outcome in multiple myeloma remains challenging despite the availability of standard prognostic biomarkers. We investigated outcome for patients relapsing early from intensive therapy on NCRI Myeloma XI. Relapse within 12 months of autologous stem cell transplant was associated with markedly worse median progression-free survival 2 (PFS2) of 18 months and overall survival (OS) of 26 months, compared to median PFS2 of 85 months and OS of 91 months for later relapsing patients despite equal access to and use of subsequent therapies, highlighting the urgent need for improved outcome prediction and early intervention strategies for myeloma patients.
Asunto(s)
Melfalán/administración & dosificación , Mieloma Múltiple , Trasplante de Células Madre , Adulto , Anciano , Autoinjertos , Costo de Enfermedad , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mieloma Múltiple/genética , Mieloma Múltiple/mortalidad , Mieloma Múltiple/terapia , Factores de Riesgo , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Adaptive designs offer great promise in improving the efficiency and patient-benefit of clinical trials. An important barrier to further increased use is a lack of understanding about which additional resources are required to conduct a high-quality adaptive clinical trial, compared to a traditional fixed design. The Costing Adaptive Trials (CAT) project investigated which additional resources may be required to support adaptive trials. METHODS: We conducted a mock costing exercise amongst seven Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) in the UK. Five scenarios were developed, derived from funded clinical trials, where a non-adaptive version and an adaptive version were described. Each scenario represented a different type of adaptive design. CTU staff were asked to provide the costs and staff time they estimated would be needed to support the trial, categorised into specified areas (e.g. statistics, data management, trial management). This was calculated separately for the non-adaptive and adaptive version of the trial, allowing paired comparisons. Interviews with 10 CTU staff who had completed the costing exercise were conducted by qualitative researchers to explore reasons for similarities and differences. RESULTS: Estimated resources associated with conducting an adaptive trial were always (moderately) higher than for the non-adaptive equivalent. The median increase was between 2 and 4% for all scenarios, except for sample size re-estimation which was 26.5% (as the adaptive design could lead to a lengthened study period). The highest increase was for statistical staff, with lower increases for data management and trial management staff. The percentage increase in resources varied across different CTUs. The interviews identified possible explanations for differences, including (1) experience in adaptive trials, (2) the complexity of the non-adaptive and adaptive design, and (3) the extent of non-trial specific core infrastructure funding the CTU had. CONCLUSIONS: This work sheds light on additional resources required to adequately support a high-quality adaptive trial. The percentage increase in costs for supporting an adaptive trial was generally modest and should not be a barrier to adaptive designs being cost-effective to use in practice. Informed by the results of this research, guidance for investigators and funders will be developed on appropriately resourcing adaptive trials.
Asunto(s)
Proyectos de Investigación , Investigadores , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Humanos , Recursos HumanosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide maintenance therapy have improved progression-free survival, primarily following autologous stem-cell transplantation. A beneficial effect of lenalidomide maintenance therapy on overall survival in this setting has been inconsistent between individual studies. Minimal data are available on the effect of maintenance lenalidomide in more aggressive disease states, such as patients with cytogenetic high-risk disease or patients ineligible for transplantation. We aimed to assess lenalidomide maintenance versus observation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, including cytogenetic risk and transplantation status subgroup analyses. METHODS: The Myeloma XI trial was an open-label, randomised, phase 3, adaptive design trial with three randomisation stages done at 110 National Health Service hospitals in England, Wales, and Scotland. There were three potential randomisations in the study: induction treatment (allocation by transplantation eligibility status); intensification treatment (allocation by response to induction therapy); and maintenance treatment. Here, we report the results of the randomisation to maintenance treatment. Eligible patients for maintenance randomisation were aged 18 years or older and had symptomatic or non-secretory multiple myeloma, had completed their assigned induction therapy as per protocol and had achieved at least a minimal response to protocol treatment, including lenalidomide. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 from Jan 13, 2011, to Jun 27, 2013, and 2:1 from Jun 28, 2013, to Aug 11, 2017) to lenalidomide maintenance (10 mg orally on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle) or observation, and stratified by allocated induction and intensification treatment, and centre. The co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. Safety analysis was per protocol. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN49407852, and clinicaltrialsregister.eu, number 2009-010956-93, and has completed recruitment. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2011, and Aug 11, 2017, 1917 patients were accrued to the maintenance treatment randomisation of the trial. 1137 patients were assigned to lenalidomide maintenance and 834 patients to observation. After a median follow-up of 31 months (IQR 18-50), median progression-free survival was 39 months (95% CI 36-42) with lenalidomide and 20 months (18-22) with observation (hazard ratio [HR] 0·46 [95% CI 0·41-0·53]; p<0·0001), and 3-year overall survival was 78·6% (95% Cl 75·6-81·6) in the lenalidomide group and 75·8% (72·4-79·2) in the observation group (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·73-1·05]; p=0·15). Progression-free survival was improved with lenalidomide compared with observation across all prespecified subgroups. On prespecified subgroup analyses by transplantation status, 3-year overall survival in transplantation-eligible patients was 87·5% (95% Cl 84·3-90·7) in the lenalidomide group and 80·2% (76·0-84·4) in the observation group (HR 0·69 [95% CI 0·52-0·93]; p=0·014), and in transplantation-ineligible patients it was 66·8% (61·6-72·1) in the lenalidomide group and 69·8% (64·4-75·2) in the observation group (1·02 [0·80-1·29]; p=0·88). By cytogenetic risk group, in standard-risk patients, 3-year overall survival was 86·4% (95% CI 80·0-90·9) in the lenalidomide group compared with 81·3% (74·2-86·7) in the observation group, and in high-risk patients, it was 74.9% (65·8-81·9) in the lenalidomide group compared with 63·7% (52·8-72·7) in the observation group; and in ultra-high-risk patients it was 62·9% (46·0-75·8) compared with 43·5% (22·2-63·1). Since these subgroup analyses results were not powered they should be interpreted with caution. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events for patients taking lenalidomide were haematological, including neutropenia (362 [33%] patients), thrombocytopenia (72 [7%] patients), and anaemia (42 [4%] patients). Serious adverse events were reported in 494 (45%) of 1097 patients receiving lenalidomide compared with 150 (17%) of 874 patients on observation. The most common serious adverse events were infections in both the lenalidomide group and the observation group. 460 deaths occurred during maintenance treatment, 234 (21%) in the lenalidomide group and 226 (27%) in the observation group, and no deaths in the lenalidomide group were deemed treatment related. INTERPRETATION: Maintenance therapy with lenalidomide significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma compared with observation, but did not improve overall survival in the intention-to-treat analysis of the whole trial population. The manageable safety profile of this drug and the encouraging results in subgroup analyses of patients across all cytogenetic risk groups support further investigation of maintenance lenalidomide in this setting. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Celgene, Amgen, Merck, and Myeloma UK.
Asunto(s)
Lenalidomida/uso terapéutico , Quimioterapia de Mantención , Mieloma Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas , Humanos , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Lenalidomida/administración & dosificación , Lenalidomida/efectos adversos , Mieloma Múltiple/cirugía , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Trasplante Autólogo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
The Myeloma X trial (ISCRTN60123120) registered patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. Participants were randomised between salvage autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) or weekly cyclophosphamide following re-induction therapy. Cytogenetic analysis performed at trial registration defined t(4;14), t(14;16) and del(17p) as high-risk. The effect of cytogenetics on time to progression (TTP) and overall survival was investigated. At 76 months median follow-up, ASCT improved TTP compared to cyclophosphamide (19 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 16-26) vs. 11 months (9-12), hazard ratio [HR]: 0·40, 95% CI: 0·29-0·56, P < 0·001), on which the presence of any single high-risk lesion had a detrimental impact [likelihood ratio test (LRT): P = 0·011]. ASCT also improved OS [67 months (95% CI 59-not reached) vs. 55 months (44-67), HR: 0·64, 95% CI: 0·42-0·99, P = 0·0435], with evidence of a detrimental impact with MYC rearrangement (LRT: P = 0·021). Twenty-one (24·7%) cyclophosphamide patients received an ASCT post-trial, median OS was not reached (95% CI: 39-not reached) for these participants compared to 31 months (22-39), in those who did not receive a post-trial ASCT. The analysis further supports the benefit of salvage ASCT, which may still be beneficial after second relapse in surviving patients. There is evidence that this benefit reduces in cytogenetic high-risk patients, highlighting the need for targeted study in this patient group.
Asunto(s)
Mieloma Múltiple/genética , Anciano , Antineoplásicos Alquilantes/uso terapéutico , Cromosomas Humanos Par 14/genética , Cromosomas Humanos Par 14/ultraestructura , Cromosomas Humanos Par 16/genética , Cromosomas Humanos Par 16/ultraestructura , Cromosomas Humanos Par 17/genética , Cromosomas Humanos Par 17/ultraestructura , Cromosomas Humanos Par 4/genética , Cromosomas Humanos Par 4/ultraestructura , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Terapia Combinada , Ciclofosfamida/uso terapéutico , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas , Humanos , Hibridación Fluorescente in Situ , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Mieloma Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiple/mortalidad , Mieloma Múltiple/terapia , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Terapia Recuperativa , Eliminación de Secuencia , Translocación Genética , Trasplante AutólogoAsunto(s)
Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Ciclofosfamida , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B/tratamiento farmacológico , Pronóstico , Rituximab , Resultado del Tratamiento , Vidarabina/análogos & derivadosAsunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Clorhidrato de Bendamustina/administración & dosificación , Clorhidrato de Bendamustina/uso terapéutico , Ciclofosfamida/administración & dosificación , Ciclofosfamida/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Vidarabina/administración & dosificación , Vidarabina/análogos & derivados , Vidarabina/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
The Myeloma X trial provided a platform to explore genetics in relation to systematic assessment of patient-reported outcomes at key points during salvage treatment in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Blood DNA was obtained in 191 subjects for single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping. By univariable analysis, the non-coding rs2562456 SNP, upstream of LINC00664, was associated with several relevant pain and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) scores at 100 days after allocation to consolidation with autologous stem cell transplantation or weekly cyclophosphamide. Presence of the minor (C) allele was associated with lower pain interference (p = 0.014) and HRQoL pain (p = 0.003), and higher HRQoL global health status (p = 0.011) and physical functioning (p = 0.007). These effects were not modified by treatment arm and were no longer significant at 6 months. Following induction therapy, the rs13361160 SNP near the CCT5 and FAM173B genes was associated with higher global health (p = 0.027) and physical functioning (p = 0.013). This exploratory study supports associations between subjective parameters in MM with SNPs previously identified in genome-wide association studies of pain. Conversely, SNPs in candidate genes involved in opioid and transporter pathways showed no effect. Further studies are warranted in well-defined cancer populations, and potentially assisted by whole genome sequencing with germline analysis in routine diagnostics in haematological cancers.
Asunto(s)
Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas , Mieloma Múltiple , Analgésicos Opioides , Ciclofosfamida , ADN , Estudio de Asociación del Genoma Completo , Humanos , Mieloma Múltiple/genética , Mieloma Múltiple/terapia , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia , Dolor , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Calidad de Vida , Trasplante Autólogo , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Minimal residual disease (MRD) can predict outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma, but limited data are available on the prognostic impact of MRD when assessed at serial time points in the context of maintenance therapy after autologous stem-cell transplant (ASCT) and the interaction between MRD and molecular risk. METHODS: Data from a large phase III trial (Myeloma XI) were examined to determine the relationship between MRD status, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in post-ASCT patients randomly assigned to lenalidomide maintenance or no maintenance at 3 months after ASCT. MRD status was assessed by flow cytometry (median sensitivity 0.004%) before maintenance random assignment (ASCT + 3) and 6 months later (ASCT + 9). RESULTS: At ASCT + 3, 475 of 750 (63.3%) patients were MRD-negative and 275 (36.7%) were MRD-positive. MRD-negative status was associated with improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.58 P < .001) and OS (HR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.85; P = .0046). At ASCT + 9, 214 of 326 (65.6%) were MRD-negative and 112 (34.4%) were MRD-positive. MRD-negative status was associated with improved PFS (HR = 0.20; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.31; P < .0001) and OS (HR = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.75; P = .0077). The findings were very similar when restricted to patients with complete response/near complete response. Sustained MRD negativity from ASCT + 3 to ASCT + 9 or the conversion to MRD negativity by ASCT + 9 was associated with the longest PFS/OS. Patients randomly assigned to lenalidomide maintenance were more likely to convert from being MRD-positive before maintenance random assignment to MRD-negative 6 months later (lenalidomide 30%, observation 17%). High-risk molecular features had an adverse effect on PFS and OS even for those patients achieving MRD-negative status. On multivariable analysis of MRD status, maintenance therapy and molecular risk maintained prognostic impact at both ASCT + 3 and ASCT + 9. CONCLUSION: In patients with multiple myeloma, MRD status at both ASCT + 3 and ASCT + 9 is a powerful predictor of PFS and OS.
Asunto(s)
Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas , Mieloma Múltiple , Humanos , Lenalidomida/efectos adversos , Mieloma Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasia Residual , Pronóstico , Trasplante Autólogo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Multiple myeloma is a plasma cell malignancy that accounts for 1%-2% of newly diagnosed cancers.At diagnosis, approximately 20% of patients can be identified, using cytogenetics, to have inferior survival (high-risk). Additionally, standard-risk patients, with detectable disease (minimal residual disease (MRD)-positive) postautologus stem cell transplant (ASCT), fare worse compared with those who do not (MRD-negative). Research is required to determine whether a risk-adapted approach post-ASCT could further improve patient outcomes. METHODS: RADAR is a UK, multicentre, risk-adapted, response-guided, open-label, randomised controlled trial for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients, using combinations of lenalidomide (R), cyclophosphamide (Cy), bortezomib (Bor), dexamethasone (D) and isatuximab (Isa).Participants receive RCyBorD(x4) induction therapy, followed by high-dose melphalan and ASCT. Post-ASCT, there are three pathways as follows:A phase III discontinuation design to assess de-escalating therapy in standard-risk MRD-negative patients. Participants receive 12 cycles of Isa maintenance. Those who remain MRD-negative are randomised to either continue or stop treatment.A phase II/III multiarm multistage design to test treatment strategies for treatment escalation in standard-risk MRD-positive patients. Participants are randomised to either; R, RBorD(x4) +R, RIsa, or RBorIsaD(x4) + RIsa.A phase II design to assess the activity of intensive treatment strategies in high-risk patients. Participants are randomised to RBorD(x4) +R or RBorIsaD(x4) + RIsa.1400 participants will be registered to allow for 500, 450 and 172 participants in each pathway. Randomisations are equal and treatment is given until disease progression or intolerance. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by the London-Central Research Ethics Committee (20/LO/0238) and capacity and capability confirmed by the appropriate local research and development department for each participating centre prior to opening recruitment. Participant informed consent is required before trial registration and reconfirmed post-ASCT. Results will be disseminated by conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISCRTN46841867.
Asunto(s)
Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas , Mieloma Múltiple , Humanos , Mieloma Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Trasplante Autólogo , Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas/métodos , Trasplante de Células Madre/efectos adversos , Neoplasia Residual/etiología , Reino Unido , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Fase II como AsuntoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Multiple myeloma is a bone marrow cancer, which predominantly affects older people. The incidence is increasing in an ageing population.Over the last 10 years, patient outcomes have improved. However, this is less apparent in older, less fit patients, who are ineligible for stem cell transplant. Research is required in this patient group, taking into account frailty and aiming to improve: treatment tolerability, clinical outcomes and quality of life. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Frailty-adjusted therapy in Transplant Non-Eligible patients with newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma is a national, phase III, multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing standard (reactive) and frailty-adjusted (adaptive) induction therapy delivery with ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRD), and to compare maintenance lenalidomide to lenalidomide+ixazomib, in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma not suitable for stem cell transplant. Overall, 740 participants will be registered into the trial to allow 720 and 478 to be randomised at induction and maintenance, respectively.All participants will receive IRD induction with the dosing strategy randomised (1:1) at trial entry. Patients randomised to the standard, reactive arm will commence at the full dose followed by toxicity dependent reactive modifications. Patients randomised to the adaptive arm will commence at a dose level determined by their International Myeloma Working Group frailty score. Following 12 cycles of induction treatment, participants alive and progression free will undergo a second (double-blind) randomisation on a 1:1 basis to maintenance treatment with lenalidomide+placebo versus lenalidomide+ixazomib until disease progression or intolerance. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the North East-Tyne & Wear South Research Ethics Committee (19/NE/0125) and capacity and capability confirmed by local research and development departments for each participating centre prior to opening to recruitment. Participants are required to provide written informed consent prior to trial registration. Trial results will be disseminated by conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN17973108, NCT03720041.
Asunto(s)
Fragilidad , Mieloma Múltiple , Anciano , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto , Fragilidad/inducido químicamente , Humanos , Lenalidomida/efectos adversos , Lenalidomida/uso terapéutico , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Mieloma Múltiple/diagnóstico , Mieloma Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Calidad de Vida , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The FLAIR trial in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia has a randomised, controlled, open-label, confirmatory, platform design. FLAIR was successfully amended to include an emerging promising experimental therapy to expedite its assessment, greatly reducing the time to reach the primary outcome compared to running a separate trial and without compromising the validity of the research or the ability to recruit to the trial and report the outcomes. The methodological and practical issues are presented, describing how they were addressed to ensure the amendment was a success. METHODS: FLAIR was designed as a two-arm trial requiring 754 patients. In stage 2, two new arms were added: a new experimental arm and a second control arm to protect the trial in case of a change in practice. In stage 3, the original experimental arm was closed as its planned recruitment target was reached. In total, 1516 participants will be randomised to the trial. RESULTS: The changes to the protocol and randomisation to add and stop arms were made seamlessly without pausing recruitment. The statistical considerations to ensure the results for the original and new hypotheses are unbiased were approved following peer review by oversight committees, Cancer Research UK, ethical and regulatory committees and pharmaceutical partners. These included the use of concurrent comparators in case of any stage effect, appropriate control of the type I error rate and consideration of analysis methods across trial stages. The operational aspects of successfully implementing the amendments are described, including gaining approvals and additional funding, data management requirements and implementation at centres. CONCLUSIONS: FLAIR is an exemplar of how an emerging experimental therapy can be assessed within an existing trial structure without compromising the conduct, reporting or validity of the trial. This strategy offered considerable resource savings and allowed the new experimental therapy to be assessed within a confirmatory trial in the UK years earlier than would have otherwise been possible. Despite the clear efficiencies, treatment arms are rarely added to ongoing trials in practice. This paper demonstrates how this strategy is acceptable, feasible and beneficial to patients and the wider research community. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN01844152 . Registered on August 08, 2014.
Asunto(s)
Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B , Preparaciones Farmacéuticas , Protocolos Clínicos , Manejo de Datos , Humanos , Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B/diagnóstico por imagen , Leucemia Linfocítica Crónica de Células B/tratamiento farmacológico , Proyectos de InvestigaciónRESUMEN
PURPOSE: In chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), TP53 mutations are associated with reduced survival and resistance to standard chemoimmunotherapy (CIT). Nevertheless, the clinical impact of subclonal TP53 mutations below 10% to 15% variant allele frequency (VAF) remains unclear. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Using a training/validation approach, we retrospectively analyzed the clinical and biological features of TP53 mutations above (high-VAF) or below (low-VAF) the previously reported 10.0% VAF threshold, as determined by deep next-generation sequencing. Clinical impact of low-VAF TP53 mutations was also confirmed in a cohort (n = 251) of CLL treated with fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-rituximab (FCR) or FCR-like regimens from two UK trials. RESULTS: In the training cohort, 97 of 684 patients bore 152 TP53 mutations, while in the validation cohort, 71 of 536 patients had 109 TP53 mutations. In both cohorts, patients with the TP53 mutation experienced significantly shorter overall survival (OS) than TP53 wild-type patients, regardless of the TP53 mutation VAF. By combining TP53 mutation and 17p13.1 deletion (del17p) data in the total cohort (n = 1,220), 113 cases were TP53 mutated only (73/113 with low-VAF mutations), 55 del17p/TP53 mutated (3/55 with low-VAF mutations), 20 del17p only, and 1,032 (84.6%) TP53 wild-type. A model including low-VAF cases outperformed the canonical model, which considered only high-VAF cases (c-indices 0.643 vs. 0.603, P < 0.0001), and improved the prognostic risk stratification of CLL International Prognostic Index. Clinical results were confirmed in CIT-treated cases (n = 552) from the retrospective cohort, and the UK trials cohort. CONCLUSIONS: TP53 mutations affected OS regardless of VAF. This finding can be used to update the definition of TP53 mutated CLL for clinical purposes.