Prednisone vs high-dose dexamethasone in newly diagnosed adult primary immune thrombocytopenia: a randomized trial.

ABSTRACT: A debate exists regarding which type of corticosteroids (standard-dose prednisone [PDN] or high-dose dexamethasone [HD-DXM]) is the best first-line treatment for adult patients with newly diagnosed untreated primary immune thrombocytopenia (pITP). An ad hoc study compared PDN with HD-DXM in newly diagnosed untreated patients with pITP (aged ≥18 but ≤80 years, platelet count of ≤20 or >20 but <50 × 109/L, and bleeding score of ≥8). Patients were randomised to receive PDN 1 mg/kg per day from days 0 to 28 (Arm A) or HD-DXM 40 mg per day for 4 days, every 14 days, for 3 consecutive courses (Arm B). Fifty-nine of 113 patients (52.2%) were randomized to Arm A and 54 of 113 (47.8%) to Arm B. In evaluable patients, total initial responses (complete response [CR], partial response [PR], minimal response [MR]) were 44 of 56 (78.57%) in Arm A and 46 of 49 (93.88%) in Arm B at days 42 and 46, respectively (P = 0.0284). Total final responses (at day 180 from initial response) were 26 of 43 (60.47%) in Arm A and 23 of 39 (58.97%) in Arm B (P = 0.8907). Total persistent responses (at 12 months from initial response) were 25 of 31 (80.65%) in Arm A and 20 of 36 (55.56%) in Arm B (P = 0.0292). Seven relapses occurred. Median follow-up was 44.4 months. Overall survival was 100% at 48 months, overall disease-free survival was 81.11% at 48 months from day 180. PDN and pulsed HD-DXM were well tolerated; HD-DXM allows effective initial responses but less long lasting than PDN. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00657410.

Predictors of unsustained measurable residual disease negativity in patients with multiple myeloma.

ABSTRACT: The prognostic impact of achieving and in particular maintaining measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity in multiple myeloma is now established; therefore, identifying among MRD-negative patients the ones at higher risk of losing MRD negativity is of importance. We analyzed predictors of unsustained MRD negativity in patients enrolled in the FORTE trial (NCT02203643). MRD was performed by multiparameter flow cytometry (sensitivity of 10-5) at premaintenance and every 6 months thereafter. The cumulative incidence (CI) of MRD resurgence and/or progression was analyzed in MRD-negative patients. A total of 306 of 474 (65%) MRD-negative patients were analyzed. After a median follow-up of 50.4 months from MRD negativity, 185 of 306 (60%) patients were still MRD negative and progression free, 118 (39%) lost their MRD-negative status, and 3 patients (1%) died without progression. Amp1q vs normal (4-year CI, 63% vs 34), ≥2 concomitant high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities vs 0 (4-year CI, 59% vs 33%), circulating tumor cells at baseline (high vs low at 4-year CI, 62% vs 32%), and time-to-reach MRD negativity postconsolidation vs preconsolidation (4-year CI, 46% vs 35%) were associated with a higher risk of unsustained MRD negativity in a multivariate Fine-Gray model. During the first 2 years of maintenance, patients receiving carfilzomib-lenalidomide vs lenalidomide alone had a lower risk of unsustained MRD negativity (4-year CI, 20% vs 33%).

Multiple Myeloma in 2023 Ways: From Trials to Real Life.

Multiple myeloma is a chronic hematologic malignancy that obstinately tends to relapse. Basic research has made giant strides in better characterizing the molecular mechanisms of the disease. The results have led to the manufacturing of new, revolutionary drugs which have been widely tested in clinical trials. These drugs have been approved and are now part of the therapeutic armamentarium. As a consequence, it is essential to combine what we know from clinical trials with real-world data in order to improve therapeutic strategies. Starting with this premise, our review aims to describe the currently employed regimens in multiple myeloma and compare clinical trials with real-life experiences. We also intend to put a spotlight on promising therapies such as T-cell engagers and chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T) which are proving to be effective in changing the course of advanced-stage disease.

Determinants of frontline tyrosine kinase inhibitor choice for patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia: A study from the Registro Italiano LMC and Campus CML.

BACKGROUND: Imatinib, dasatinib, and nilotinib are tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) approved in Italy for frontline treatment of chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML). The choice of TKI is based on a combined evaluation of the patient's and the disease characteristics. The aim of this study was to analyze the use of frontline TKI therapy in an unselected cohort of Italian patients with CP-CML to correlate the choice with the patient's features. METHODS: A total of 1967 patients with CP-CML diagnosed between 2012 and 2019 at 36 centers throughout Italy were retrospectively evaluated; 1089 patients (55.4%) received imatinib and 878 patients (44.6%) received a second-generation (2G) TKI. RESULTS: Second-generation TKIs were chosen for most patients aged <45 years (69.2%), whereas imatinib was used in 76.7% of patients aged >65 years (p < .001). There was a predominant use of imatinib in intermediate/high European long-term survival risk patients (60.0%/66.0% vs. 49.7% in low-risk patients) and a limited use of 2G-TKIs in patients with comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, previous neoplasms, ischemic heart disease, or stroke and in those with >3 concomitant drugs. We observed a greater use of imatinib (61.1%) in patients diagnosed in 2018-2019 compared to 2012-2017 (53.2%; p = .002). In multivariable analysis, factors correlated with imatinib use were age > 65 years, spleen size, the presence of comorbidities, and ≥3 concomitant medications. CONCLUSIONS: This observational study of almost 2000 cases of CML shows that imatinib is the frontline drug of choice in 55% of Italian patients with CP-CML, with 2G-TKIs prevalently used in younger patients and in those with no concomitant clinical conditions. Introduction of the generic formulation in 2018 seems to have fostered imatinib use.

Carfilzomib induction, consolidation, and maintenance with or without autologous stem-cell transplantation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: pre-planned cytogenetic subgroup analysis of the randomised, phase 2 FORTE trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCA) represent an unmet medical need. In the FORTE trial, lenalidomide and dexamethasone plus carfilzomib (KRd) induction resulted in a higher proportion of patients with at least a very good partial response as compared with carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (KCd), and carfilzomib plus lenalidomide maintenance prolonged progression-free survival compared with lenalidomide maintenance. In this prespecified analysis of the FORTE trial, we described the outcomes of enrolled patients according to their cytogenetic risk. METHODS: The UNITO-MM-01/FORTE was a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial done at 42 Italian academic and community practice centres, which enrolled transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma aged 18-65 years. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed multiple myeloma based on standard International Myeloma Working Group criteria, a Karnofsky performance status of at least 60%, and had not received any previous treatment with anti-myeloma therapy. At enrolment, patients were stratified according to International Staging System stage (I vs II/III) and age (<60 years vs 60-65 years) and randomly assigned (1:1:1) to KRd plus autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT; four 28-day induction cycles with KRd, melphalan at 200 mg/m2 and ASCT [MEL200-ASCT], followed by four 28-day KRd consolidation cycles), 12 28-day KRd cycles, or KCd plus ASCT (four 28-day induction cycles with KCd, MEL200-ASCT, and four 28-day KCd consolidation cycles), using a web-based system (block randomisation, block size of 12). Carfilzomib was administered at 20 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of cycle 1, followed by 36 mg/m2 intravenously administered on days 8, 9, 15, and 16 of cycle 1, and then 36 mg/m2 intravenously administered for all subsequent doses on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16; lenalidomide 25 mg was administered orally on days 1-21; cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 was administered orally on days 1, 8, and 15; and dexamethasone 20 mg was administered orally or intravenously on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, and 23. After the consolidation phase, patients were stratified according to induction-consolidation treatment and randomly assigned (1:1; block size of 8) to maintenance treatment with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide or lenalidomide alone. Carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 was administered intravenously on days 1-2 and days 15-16, every 28 days for up to 2 years, and lenalidomide 10 mg was administered orally on days 1-21 every 28 days until progression or intolerance in both groups. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with at least a very good partial response after induction with KRd versus KCd and progression-free survival with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus lenalidomide alone as maintenance treatment. In this preplanned analysis, we included patients enrolled in the FORTE trial with complete cytogenetic data on del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16), del(1p), gain(1q) (3 copies), and amp(1q) (≥4 copies) assessed by fluorescence in-situ hybridisation analysis on CD138-positive sorted cells. We assessed progression-free survival, overall survival, minimal residual disease negativity, and 1-year sustained minimal residual disease negativity according to the presence of zero, one, and two or more HRCA across treatment groups. The FORTE trial is ongoing, and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02203643. FINDINGS: Between Feb 23, 2015, and April 5, 2017, 477 patients were enrolled, of whom 396 (83%) had complete cytogenetic data and were analysed (176 [44%] of whom were women and 220 [56%] were men). The median follow-up from first randomisation was 51 months (IQR 46-56). 4-year progression-free survival was 71% (95% CI 64-78) in patients with zero HRCA, 60% (95% CI 52-69) in patients with one HRCA, and 39% (95% CI 30-50) in patients with two or more HRCA. Compared with patients with zero HRCA, the risk of progression or death was similar in patients with one HRCA (hazard ratio [HR] 1·33 [95% CI 0·90-1·97]; p=0·15) and higher in patients with two or more HRCA (HR 2·56 [95% CI 1·74-3·75]); p<0·0001) across the induction-intensification-consolidation groups. Moreover, the risk of progression or death was also higher in patients with two or more HRCA versus those with one HRCA (HR 1·92 [95% CI 1·34-2·76]; p=0·0004). 4-year overall survival from the first randomisation was 94% (95% CI 91-98) in patients with zero HRCA, 83% (95% CI 76-90) in patients with one HRCA, and 63% (95% CI 54-74) in patients with two or more HRCA. Compared with patients with zero HRCA, the risk of death was significantly higher in patients with one HRCA (HR 2·55 [95% CI 1·22-5·36]; p=0·013) and two or more HRCA (HR 6·53 [95% CI 3·24-13·18]; p<0·0001). Patients with two or more HRCA also had a significantly higher risk of death than those with one HRCA (HR 2·56 [95% CI 1·53-4·28]; p=0·0004). The rates of 1-year sustained minimal residual disease negativity were similar in patients with zero HRCA (53 [35%] of 153] and with one HRCA (57 [41%] of 138) and were lower in patients with two or more HRCA (25 [24%] of 105). The median duration of follow-up from second randomisation was 37 months (IQR 33-42). 3-year progression-free survival from the second randomisation was 80% (95% CI 74-88) in patients with zero HRCA, 68% (95% CI 59-78) in patients with one HRCA, and 53% (95% CI 42-67) in patients with two or more HRCA. The risk of progression or death was higher in patients with one HRCA (HR 1·68 [95% CI 1·01-2·80]; p=0·048) and two or more HRCA (2·74 [95% CI 1·60-4·69], p=0·0003) than in patients with zero HRCA. INTERPRETATION: This preplanned analysis of the FORTE trial showed that carfilzomib-based induction-intensification-consolidation regimens are effective strategies in patients with standard risk (zero HRCA) and high-risk (one HRCA) myeloma, resulting in similar rates of progression-free survival and 1-year sustained minimal residual disease negativity. Despite promising progression-free survival, patients with ultra-high-risk disease (those with 2 or more HRCA) still have an increased risk of progression and death and therefore represent an unmet medical need. FUNDING: Amgen and Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb.

Survival Risk Scores for Real-Life Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Patients Receiving Elotuzumab or Carfilzomib In Combination With Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone as Salvage Therapy: Analysis of 919 Cases Outside Clinical Trials.

The present study aimed to develop two survival risk scores (RS) for overall survival (OS, SRS KRd/EloRd ) and progression-free survival (PFS, PRS KRd/EloRd ) in 919 relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients who received carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd)/elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (EloRd). The median OS was 35.4 months, with no significant difference between the KRd arm versus the EloRd arm. In the multivariate analysis, advanced ISS (HR = 1.31; P = 0.025), interval diagnosis-therapy (HR = 1.46; P = 0.001), number of previous lines of therapies (HR = 1.96; P < 0.0001), older age (HR = 1.72; P < 0.0001), and prior lenalidomide exposure (HR = 1.30; P = 0.026) remained independently associated with death. The median PFS was 20.3 months, with no difference between the two strategies. The multivariate model identified a significant progression/death risk increase for ISS III (HR = 1.37; P = 0.002), >3 previous lines of therapies (HR = 1.67; P < 0.0001), older age (HR = 1.64; P < 0.0001), and prior lenalidomide exposure (HR = 1.35; P = 0.003). Three risk SRS KRd/EloRd categories were generated: low-risk (134 cases, 16.5%), intermediate-risk (467 cases, 57.3%), and high-risk categories (213 cases, 26.2%). The 1- and 2-year OS probability rates were 92.3% and 83.8% for the low-risk (HR = 1, reference category), 81.1% and 60.6% (HR = 2.73; P < 0.0001) for the intermediate-risk, and 65.5% and 42.5% (HR = 4.91; P < 0.0001) for the high-risk groups, respectively. Notably, unlike the low-risk group, which did not cross the median timeline, the OS median values were 36.6 and 18.6 months for the intermediate- and high-risk cases, respectively. Similarly, three PRS KRd/EloRd risk categories were engendered. Based on such grouping, 338 (41.5%) cases were allocated in the low-, 248 (30.5%) in the intermediate-, and 228 (28.0%) in the high-risk groups. The 1- and 2-year PFS probability rates were 71.4% and 54.5% for the low-risk (HR = 1, reference category), 68.9% and 43.7% (HR = 1.95; P < 0.0001) for the intermediate-risk, and 48.0% and 27.1% (HR = 3.73; P < 0.0001) for the high-risk groups, respectively. The PFS median values were 29.0, 21.0, and 11.7 months for the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk cases. This analysis showed 2.7- and 4.9-fold increased risk of death for the intermediate- and high-risk cases treated with KRd/EloRd as salvage therapy. The combined progression/death risks of the two categories were increased 1.3- and 2.2-fold compared to the low-risk group. In conclusion, SRS KRd/EloRd and PRS KRd/EloRd may represent accessible and globally applicable models in daily clinical practice and ultimately represent a prognostic tool for RRMM patients who received KRd or EloRd.

Carfilzomib combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KRd) as salvage therapy for multiple myeloma patients: italian, multicenter, retrospective clinical experience with 600 cases outside of controlled clinical trials.

In combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KRd), Carfilzomib has been approved for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) on ASPIRE trial. Efficacy and safety of the triplet are still the object of investigation by many groups to confirm ASPIRE results in the setting of RRMM treated in real-life who don't meet trial restrictive inclusion criteria. Therefore, we report a retrospective multicenter analysis of 600 RRMM patients treated with KRd between December 2015 and December 2018. The median age was 64 years (range 33-85), and the median number of previous therapies was two (range 1-11). After a median of 11 KRd cycles, the overall response rate was 79.9%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 22 months, and the 2-year probability of PFS was 47.6%. Creatinine clearance<30 ml/min, >1 line of previous therapy, and high-risk FISH were all associated with a poor prognosis in multivariate analysis. The median overall survival (OS) was 34.8 months; the 2-year probability of OS was 63.5%. At multivariate analysis, creatinine clearance<30 ml/min, >1 line of previous therapy, and high-risk FISH were significantly associated with poor prognosis. After a median follow-up of 16 months (range 1-50), 259 withdrew from therapy. The main discontinuation reason was progressive disease (81.8%). Seventy-four patients (12.3%) discontinued therapy for toxicity. The most frequent side effects were hematological (anemia 49.3%, neutropenia 42.7%, thrombocytopenia 42.5%) and cardiovascular (hypertension 14.5%, heart failure 2.5%, arrhythmias 3.6%). Our study confirms the safety and efficacy of KRd in the real-life setting of RRMM patients and encourages its use in clinical practice.

Adjusted comparison between elotuzumab and carfilzomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone as salvage therapy for multiple myeloma patients.

The lack of a randomized trial comparing carfilzomib (K) versus elotuzumab (Elo) associated with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) prompted us to assess the relative usefulness of one triplet over the other. Five independent retrospective cohorts of 883 relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients, including 300 EloRd and 583 KRd cases, outside clinical trials, entered this non-randomized comparison. KRd cohort accounted for a higher incidence of younger patients, cases with ≥3 lines of therapy, already exposed to lenalidomide, International Staging System (ISS) stage III, and abnormal lactic dehydrogenase (LDH) level compared with EloRd cohort. Moreover, cytogenetic risk categories, detected in roughly one-third of cases, were equally distributed between the two therapy arms. The probability of CR+VGPR response was significantly higher in KRd (n = 314, 53.9%) than in EloRd patients (n = 111, 37.0%). Likewise, the cumulative incidence function of CR+VGPR, taking into account the competitive risk of death, was significantly higher in KRd arm patients than those in the EloRd arm (p = .003). Moreover, KRd treatment significantly reduced the progression or death risk by 46% in an adjusted multivariate analysis (HR: 0.54, 95% CI 0.42-0.69, p < .0001). Finally, in an adjusted illness-progression/death model, the effect of KRd versus EloRd was of higher magnitude among those who achieved CR+VGPR (-39% hazard ratio reduction, p = .02) than among those who achieved < VGPR (-29% hazard ratio reduction, p = .007). With limitations characteristic to any retrospective analysis, this current clinical practice study's overall results demonstrated potential benefits of KRd therapy compared with EloRd. This observation may help the daily clinical practice.

CART-Cell Therapy: Recent Advances and New Evidence in Multiple Myeloma.

Despite the improvement in survival outcomes, multiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable disease. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy targeting B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) represents a new strategy for the treatment of relapsed/refractory MM (R/R). In this paper, we describe several recent advances in the field of anti-BCMA CAR T-cell therapy and MM. Currently, available data on anti-BCMA CART-cell therapy has demonstrated efficacy and manageable toxicity in heavily pretreated R/R MM patients. Despite this, the main issues remain to be addressed. First of all, a significant proportion of patients eventually relapse. The potential strategy to prevent relapse includes sequential or combined infusion with CAR T-cells against targets other than BCMA, CAR T-cells with novel dual-targeting vector design, and BCMA expression upregulation. Another dark side of CART therapy is safety. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) andneurologic toxicity are well-described adverse effects. In the MM trials, most CRS events tended to be grade 1 or 2, with fewer patients experiencing grade 3 or higher. Another critical point is the extended timeline of the manufacturing process. Allo-CARs offers the potential for scalable manufacturing for on-demand treatment with shorter waiting days. Another issue is undoubtedly going to be access to this therapy. Currently, only a few academic centers can perform these procedures. Recognizing these issues, the excellent response with BCMA-targeted CAR T-cell therapy makes it a treatment strategy of great promise.

Daratumumab as Single Agent in Relapsed/Refractory Myeloma Patients: A Retrospective Real-Life Survey.

BACKGROUND: The anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody daratumumab is approved as a single agent for the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who received at least three prior lines of therapy, including proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory agent. A retrospective multicentric study was designed to evaluate feasibility, tolerability, and efficacy of daratumumab in monotherapy in RRMM. METHODS: This study included 44 consecutive RRMM patients that underwent daratumumab monotherapy after a median number of four prior therapies (range 2-9). Patients were treated in seven Sicilian centers, as part of Sicilian Myeloma Network and three Calabrian centers outside of controlled clinical trials from August 2016 through July 2020. RESULTS: The regimen was well tolerated with few grade 3-4 haematological and rare non-haematological adverse events, such as pneumonia. Definitive discontinuation was due to disease progression in 25 (57%) patients. Since three patients did not complete at least one full cycle, a total of 41 patients was evaluated for response. Overall response rate was 37%, and the disease control rate (stable disease or better) was high (73%). The best achieved responses within 6 months were very good partial remission or better (27%), partial remission (10%), minimal response (14%) and stable disease (22%). After a median follow up of 7.8 months, median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.2 months and overall survival (OS) 7.8 months. Univariate analysis showed that patients with PR or better after 6 months of therapy had longer median PFS and OS (respectively 29.5 vs 3.6 months, p=0.0001 and 30.6 vs 3.9 months p=0.0001), confirmed by multivariate analysis. Furthermore, standard cytogenetic risk and biochemical relapse type had prolonged median PFS, but not OS (respectively unreached vs 2.6, p=0.03 and 23.9 vs 6.2, p=0.05) in both univariate and multivariate analysis. Additionally, univariate analysis showed that patients treated with carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone prior to daratumumab had significantly shorter PFS compared to pomalidomide-dexamethasone (3.4 months vs 9.3 months, p=0.03), that multivariate analysis failed to confirm. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that daratumumab as single agent is safe and well-tolerated regimen in real-life, associated to prolonged PFS and OS in responding patients. No new safety signals were identified.

Autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation versus bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone, with or without bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone consolidation therapy, and lenalidomide maintenance for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (EMN02/HO95): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of highly active novel agents has led some to question the role of autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) and subsequent consolidation therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. We therefore compared autologous HSCT with bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) as intensification therapy, and bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (VRD) consolidation therapy with no consolidation. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 study we recruited previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma at 172 academic and community practice centres of the European Myeloma Network. Eligible patients were aged 18-65 years, had symptomatic multiple myeloma stage 1-3 according to the International Staging System (ISS), measurable disease (serum M protein >10 g/L or urine M protein >200 mg in 24 h or abnormal free light chain [FLC] ratio with involved FLC >100 mg/L, or proven plasmacytoma by biopsy), and WHO performance status grade 0-2 (grade 3 was allowed if secondary to myeloma). Patients were first randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either four 42-day cycles of bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 administered intravenously or subcutaneously on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, and 32) combined with melphalan (9 mg/m2 administered orally on days 1-4) and prednisone (60 mg/m2 administered orally on days 1-4) or autologous HSCT after high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m2), stratified by site and ISS disease stage. In centres with a double HSCT policy, the first randomisation (1:1:1) was to VMP or single or double HSCT. Afterwards, a second randomisation assigned patients to receive two 28-day cycles of consolidation therapy with bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 either intravenously or subcutaneously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11), lenalidomide (25 mg orally on days 1-21), and dexamethasone (20 mg orally on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12) or no consolidation; both groups received lenalidomide maintenance therapy (10 mg orally on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle). The primary outcomes were progression-free survival from the first and second randomisations, analysed in the intention-to-treat population, which included all patients who underwent each randomisation. All patients who received at least one dose of study drugs were included in the safety analyses. This study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2009-017903-28) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01208766), and has completed recruitment. FINDINGS: Between Feb 25, 2011, and April 3, 2014, 1503 patients were enrolled. 1197 patients were eligible for the first randomisation, of whom 702 were assigned to autologous HSCT and 495 to VMP; 877 patients who were eligible for the first randomisation underwent the second randomisation to VRD consolidation (n=449) or no consolidation (n=428). The data cutoff date for the current analysis was Nov 26, 2018. At a median follow-up of 60·3 months (IQR 52·2-67·6), median progression-free survival was significantly improved with autologous HSCT compared with VMP (56·7 months [95% CI 49·3-64·5] vs 41·9 months [37·5-46·9]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73, 0·62-0·85; p=0·0001). For the second randomisation, the number of events of progression or death at data cutoff was lower than that preplanned for the final analysis; therefore, the results from the second protocol-specified interim analysis, when 66% of events were reached, are reported (data cutoff Jan 18, 2018). At a median follow-up of 42·1 months (IQR 32·3-49·2), consolidation therapy with VRD significantly improved median progression-free survival compared with no consolidation (58·9 months [54·0-not estimable] vs 45·5 months [39·5-58·4]; HR 0·77, 0·63-0·95; p=0·014). The most common grade ≥3 adverse events in the autologous HSCT group compared to the VMP group included neutropenia (513 [79%] of 652 patients vs 137 [29%] of 472 patients), thrombocytopenia (541 [83%] vs 74 [16%]), gastrointestinal disorders (80 [12%] vs 25 [5%]), and infections (192 [30%] vs 18 [4%]). 239 (34%) of 702 patients in the autologous HSCT group and 135 (27%) of 495 in the VMP group had at least one serious adverse event. Infection was the most common serious adverse event in each of the treatment groups (206 [56%] of 368 and 70 [37%] of 189). 38 (12%) of 311 deaths from first randomisation were likely to be treatment related: 26 (68%) in the autologous HSCT group and 12 (32%) in the VMP group, most frequently due to infections (eight [21%]), cardiac events (six [16%]), and second primary malignancies (20 [53%]). INTERPRETATION: This study supports the use of autologous HSCT as intensification therapy and the use of consolidation therapy in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, even in the era of novel agents. The role of high-dose chemotherapy needs to be reassessed in future studies, in particular in patients with undetectable minimal residual disease after four-drug induction regimens including a monoclonal antiboby combined with an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor plus dexamethasone. FUNDING: Janssen and Celgene.

A comparative effectiveness study of lipegfilgrastim in multiple myeloma patients after high dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplant.

G-CSF administration after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has been shown to expedite neutrophil recovery. Several studies comparing filgrastim and pegfilgrastim in the post-ASCT setting concluded that the two are at least equally effective. Lipegfilgrastim (LIP) is a new long-acting, once-per-cycle G-CSF. This multicentric, prospective study aimed to describe the use of LIP in multiple myeloma patients receiving high-dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and compare LIP with historic controls of patients who received short-acting agent (filgrastim [FIL]). Overall, 125 patients with a median age of 60 years received G-CSF after ASCT (80 patients LIP on day 1 post-ASCT and 45 patients FIL on day 5 post-ASCT). The median duration of grade 4 neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count [ANC] < 0.5 × 10 [9]/L) was 5 days in both LIP and FIL groups, whereas the median number of days to reach ANC ≥ 0.5 × 10 [9]/L was 10% lower in the LIP than in the FIL group (10 vs 11 days), respectively. Male sex was significantly associated with a faster ANC ≥ 0.5 × 10 [9] L response (p = 0.015). The incidence of FN was significantly lower in the LIP than in the FIL group (29% vs 49%, respectively, p = 0.024). The days to discharge after ASCT infusion were greater in patients with FN (p < 0.001). The study indicates that LIP had a shorter time to ANC recovery and is more effective than FIL for the prevention of FN in the ASCT setting.

Lenalidomide Maintenance with or without Prednisone in Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Patients: A Pooled Analysis.

: We conducted a pooled analysis of two phase III trials, RV-MM-EMN-441 and EMN01, to compare maintenance with lenalidomide-prednisone vs. lenalidomide in newly diagnosed transplant-eligible and -ineligible myeloma patients. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival, progression-free survival 2 and overall survival with both regimens. A secondary aim was to evaluate the impact of duration of maintenance on overall survival and on outcome after relapse. A total of 625 patients (lenalidomide-prednisone arm, n = 315; lenalidomide arm, n = 310) were analyzed. The median follow-up was 58 months. Median progression-free survival (25 vs. 19 months; p = 0.08), progression-free survival 2 (56 vs. 49 months; p = 0.9) and overall survival (73 months vs. NR; p = 0.08) were not significantly different between the two arms. Toxicity profiles of lenalidomide-prednisone and lenalidomide were similar, with the exception of neutropenia that was higher in the lenalidomide arm (grade ≥ 3: 9% vs. 19%, p < 0.001), without an increase in the rate of infections. Overall survival (median NR vs. 49 months, p < 0.001), progression-free survival from relapse (median 35 vs. 24 months, p = 0.004) and overall survival from relapse (median not reached vs. 41 months, p = 0.002) were significantly longer in patients continuing maintenance for ≥2 years. We showed that the addition of prednisone at 25 or 50 mg every other day (eod) to lenalidomide maintenance did not induce any significant advantage.

Clinical relevance of hypogammaglobulinemia, clinical and biologic variables on the infection risk and outcome of patients with stage A chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

The prognostic effect of hypogammaglobulinemia (HGG), clinical and biologic characteristics on the infection risk and outcome has been retrospectively analyzed in 899 patients with stage A chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Low levels of IgG were recorded in 19.9% of patients at presentation, low levels of IgM and/or IgA in 10.4% and an additional 20% of patients developed HGG during the course of the disease. Before the start of any treatment, 160 (12.9%) patients experienced at least one grade ≥3 infection requiring a systemic anti-infective treatment and/or hospitalization. While IgG levels at diagnosis were not associated with an increased risk of grade ≥3 infection or with an adverse outcome, a significantly increased rate of grade ≥3 infections was recorded in patients with unmutated IGHV (p=0.011) and unfavorable FISH aberrations (p=0.009). Late onset HGG, more frequently recorded in patients with Rai stage I-II (p=0.001) and unmutated IGHV (p=0.001), was also associated with a higher rate of severe infections (p=0.002). These data indicate that, stage A patients with clinical and biologic characteristics of a more aggressive disease develop more frequently late onset HGG, grade ≥3 infections and require a closer clinical monitoring.

Bendamustine, Low-dose dexamethasone, and lenalidomide (BdL) for the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma confirms very promising results in a phase I/II study.

Lenalidomide and dexamethasone are an effective treatment for naïve and relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Bendamustine is a good option for B-cell malignancies showing only partial cross resistance with alkylating agents used in MM patients. Based on these considerations, we proposed a phase I/II study testing escalating doses of bendamustine and lenalidomide and fixed low doses of dexamethasone (BdL). Fifteen patients were enrolled in phase I study. Maximum tolerated dose was established at dose "level 0": bendamustine 40 mg/m2 days 1,2; lenalidomide 10 mg days 1-21; d 40 mg days 1,8,15,22 every 28-day cycle, for six cycles. We enrolled 23 patients in the phase II study. BdL combination showed mainly hematological toxicities, fever and infections. Overall response rate was 47%. After median follow up of 22 months, median PFS was 10 months. Two-years OS rate was 65%. BdL combination confirmed to be a promising treatment for patients with relapsed/refractory MM.

Health-related quality of life and burden of fatigue in patients with primary immune thrombocytopenia by phase of disease.

The main objective of this study was to compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of primary immune thrombocytopenia (pITP) patients with that of general population, overall, and by patient group (i.e., newly diagnosed, persistent, and chronic patients). Fatigue was also investigated as a secondary objective. Overall, 424 adult patients were enrolled in a multicenter observational study and the control group consisted of a representative sample from the general population. Propensity score matching plus further multivariate linear regression adjustment was used to compare HRQOL outcomes between pITP patients and general population. Mean age of patients was 54 years. Of those with HRQOL assessment, 99 patients (23.6%) were newly diagnosed, 53 (12.6%) were persistent, and 268 (63.8%) were chronic pITP patients. Comparison by patient group versus their respective peers in the general population revealed greater impairments in persistent pITP patients. Persistent pITP patients reported clinically meaningful impairments in physical functioning (-15; 95% CI -24.1 to -5.8; P = 0.002), social functioning (-15.3; 95% CI -25.5 to -5.1; P = 0.004), role physical (-28.4; 95% CI -43.1 to -13.7; P < 0.001), role emotional (-23.9; 95% CI -40.1 to -7.7; P = 0.004), and mental health scales (-11.3; 95% CI -21.2 to -1.4; P = 0.026) of the SF-36 questionnaire. Higher fatigue severity was associated with lower physical and mental HRQOL outcomes. Our findings suggest that the burden of the disease and treatment might depend on the disease phase and that persistent pITP patients are the most vulnerable subgroup. Am. J. Hematol. 91:995-1001, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Combination of bendamustine and rituximab as front-line therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: multicenter, retrospective clinical practice experience with 279 cases outside of controlled clinical trials.

Recently, encouraging results in terms of safety and efficacy have been obtained using bendamustine-rituximab (BR) in untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) patients enrolled in a phase II study. Here, we report a retrospective international multicenter study of CLL patients treated with BR as front-line therapy. The cohort included 279 patients with progressive CLL from 33 centers (29 Italian, 3 Israeli and 1 German) who received at least 1 cycle of BR as first-line treatment during the 2008-2014 period. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BR administered as front-line therapy, outside of controlled clinical trials. Median age was 70 years (range, 43-86 years); 62.4% were males and 35.8% had Binet stage C. Forty-two patients (15.2%) were unfit (cumulative illness rating scale [CIRS] score ≥7), and 140 (50.2%) had creatinine clearance ≤70 ml/min. Fluorescent in situ hybridisation analysis, available for 192 cases, showed that 21 (10.9%) had del11q and 18 (9.4%) del17p. The overall response rate (ORR) was 86.4%, with a complete remission rate of 28%. Patients with del17p had an ORR of 66.7%. After median follow-up of 24 months, the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 69.9%; CIRS ≥7, immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable-region (IGHV) unmutated status, del17p and BR dose intensity <80% were independently associated with shorter PFS. Grade III or IV neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anaemia were observed in 25.9%, 15.4%, and 15.1% of patients, respectively. Twenty-four patients (8.6%) had severe infections. BR is also an effective and safe regimen for untreated CLL patients, outside of controlled clinical trials.