The CLL12 trial: ibrutinib vs placebo in treatment-naïve, early-stage chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Observation is the current standard of care for patients with early-stage asymptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), as chemotherapy-based interventions have failed to prolong survival. We hypothesized that early intervention with ibrutinib would be well tolerated and lead to superior disease control in a subgroup of early-stage patients with CLL. The phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled CLL12 trial randomly assigned asymptomatic, treatment-naïve Binet stage A CLL patients at increased risk of progression in a 1:1 ratio to receive ibrutinib (n = 182) or placebo (n = 181) at a dose of 420 mg daily. At a median follow-up of 31 months, the study met its primary endpoint by significantly improving event-free survival in the ibrutinib group (median, not reached vs 47.8 months; hazard ratio = 0.25; 95% confidence interval = 0.14-0.43, P < .0001). Compared with placebo, ibrutinib did not increase overall toxicity, yielding similar incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs). The most common serious AEs were atrial fibrillation, pneumonia, and rash in the ibrutinib group, and basal cell carcinoma, pneumonia, and myocardial infarction in the placebo group. Ibrutinib-associated risk for bleeding (33.5%) was decreased by prohibiting the use of oral anticoagulants through an amendment of the study protocol and by avoiding CYP3A4 drug-drug interactions. Ibrutinib confirms efficacy in CLL patients at an early stage with an increased risk of progression. However, the results do not justify changing the current standard of "watch and wait." This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02863718.

Outcomes with ibrutinib in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: Results from the German multicentre REALITY study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess treatment adherence, effectiveness and safety outcomes of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) receiving ibrutinib in a real-world setting. METHODS: Patients enrolled in REALITY were ≥18 years with a confirmed diagnosis of CLL and were receiving ibrutinib as a first-line (1L), 2L or ≥3L therapy. Treatment retention, adherence, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and time to next therapy were assessed at 1 and 2 years overall, by typology and by cytogenetic subgroups. PFS and OS were analysed using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: Exactly 302 patients were enrolled across 57 sites in Germany, from January 2017 to July 2021. One-year retention rates were 69.9% overall (primary endpoint), 77.9% for 1L patients, and 77.6%/78.8% for high-risk patients with del17p/TP53. At 2 years, PFS/OS rates were 77.8%/90.7% overall (1L, 82.7%/90.4%), and were consistent across cytogenetic subgroups. PFS rates were higher for 1L versus ≥3L patients. Patients with the low-acceptance/low-control typology at baseline were less likely to retain treatment at 1 year versus the high-acceptance/high-control typology. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The REALITY study provides further evidence of the effectiveness and safety of ibrutinib in patients with CLL in a real-world setting, particularly in earlier treatment lines.

Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab as first-line treatment in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: A long-term analysis of the German CLL Study Group (GCLLSG) registry.

Long-term data of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients with favorable risk who were treated with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) within clinical trials show good efficacy. We here report long-term data collected within the GCLLSG registry. Altogether, 417 CLL patients who received first-line treatment with FCR were analyzed, of which 293 (70.3%) were treated outside of clinical trials. The median observation time from first-line was 95.8 (interquartile range 58.7-126.8) months. Focusing on data of 194 (46.5%) patients who received FCR first-line treatment after 2013 (start of data collection within GCLLSG registry), responses were documented in 85% of the patients, non-responses in 15%, and for 3.6% the assessment was missing. Median event-free survival (EFS, time until disease progression, subsequent treatment, or death) was 60.2 months with a 5-year EFS-rate of 50.6%. Patients with higher-risk disease, characterized by unmutated IGHV (N = 78), had a median EFS of 45.4 months with a 5-year EFS rate of 36.3%, while the median EFS was 77.5 months with a 5-year EFS rate of 60.3% in patients with mutated IGHV (N = 40). Median overall survival was not reached with a 5-year survival rate of 92.7%. In summary, first-line FCR was associated with long EFS, especially in patients exhibiting a mutated IGHV status.

Treatment with idelalisib in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia - real world data from the registry of the German CLL Study Group.

Idelalisib in combination with rituximab is an efficacious treatment for patients suffering from chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with known limitations due to toxicities. However, the benefit after prior Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) therapy remains unclear. For this analysis, 81 patients included in a non-interventional registry study of the German CLL study group (registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as # NCT02863692) meeting the predefined criteria of a confirmed diagnosis of CLL and being treated with idelalisib containing regimens outside clinical trials were considered. 11 patients were treatment naïve (13.6%) and 70 patients (86.4%) pretreated. Patients had median of one prior therapy line (range 0-11). Median treatment duration with idelalisib was 5.1 months (range 0-55.0 months). Of 58 patients with documented treatment outcome, 39 responded to idelalisib containing therapy (67.2%). Patients treated with the BTKi ibrutinib as last prior treatment prior to idelalisib responded in 71.4% compared to a response rate of 61.9% in patients without prior ibrutinib. Median event free survival (EFS) was 15.9 months with a 16 versus 14 months EFS in patients with ibrutinib as last prior treatment or not, respectively. Median overall survival was 46.6 months. In conclusion, treatment with idelalisib appears to have a valuable impact in patients being refractory to prior ibrutinib therapy even though there are limitations in our analysis due to the low number of patients included.

Quality of life and outcome of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer receiving first-line chemotherapy with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine: Real-life results from the prospective QOLIXANE trial of the Platform for Outcome, Quality of Life and Translational Research on Pancreatic Cancer registry.

Few data exist on health-related quality of life (QoL) in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) receiving first-line chemotherapy (Awad L ZE, Mesbah M Boston, MA. Applying survival data methodology to analyze quality of life data, in Mesbah M, Cole BF, Ting Lee M-L (eds): Statistical Methods for Quality of Life Studies: Design, Measurements and Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002). The QOLIXANE study is a prospective, noninterventional, multicenter substudy of the Platform for Outcome, Quality of Life and Translational Research on Pancreatic Cancer (PARAGON) registry, which evaluated QoL in patients with mPC receiving first-line gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy in real-life setting. QoL was prospectively measured via EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaires at baseline and every month thereafter. Therapy and efficacy parameters were prospectively collected. Main objectives were the rate of patients without deterioration of Global Health Status/QoL (GHS/QoL) at 3 and 6 months. Six hundred patients were enrolled in 95 German study sites. Median progression-free survival was 5.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.2-6.3). Median overall survival (OS) was 8.9 months (95% CI, 7.9-10.2), while median time to deterioration of GHS/QoL was 4.7 months (95% CI, 4.0-5.6). With a baseline GHS/QoL score of 46 (SD, 22.8), baseline QoL of the patients was severely impaired, in most cases due to loss in role functioning and fatigue. In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, 61% and 41% of patients had maintained GHS/QoL after 3 and 6 months, respectively. However, in the QoL response analysis, 35% and 19% of patients had maintained (improved or stable) GHS/QoL after 3 and 6 months, respectively, while 14% and 9% had deteriorated GHS/QoL with the remaining patients being nonevaluable. In the Cox regression analysis, GHS/QoL scores strongly predicted survival with a hazard ratio of 0.86 (P < .0001). Patients with mPC have poor QoL at baseline that deteriorates within a median of 4.7 months. Treatment with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel is associated with maintained QoL in relevant proportions of patients. However, overall, results remain poor, reflecting the aggressive nature of the disease.

Obinutuzumab for the First-Line Treatment of Follicular Lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Rituximab-based immunochemotherapy has improved outcomes in patients with follicular lymphoma. Obinutuzumab is a glycoengineered type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody. We compared rituximab-based chemotherapy with obinutuzumab-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced-stage follicular lymphoma. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients to undergo induction treatment with obinutuzumab-based chemotherapy or rituximab-based chemotherapy. Patients with a response received maintenance treatment for up to 2 years with the same antibody that they had received in induction. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 1202 patients with follicular lymphoma underwent randomization (601 patients in each group). After a median follow-up of 34.5 months (range, 0 to 54.5), a planned interim analysis showed that obinutuzumab-based chemotherapy resulted in a significantly lower risk of progression, relapse, or death than rituximab-based chemotherapy (estimated 3-year rate of progression-free survival, 80.0% vs. 73.3%; hazard ratio for progression, relapse, or death, 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51 to 0.85; P=0.001). Similar results were seen with regard to independently reviewed progression-free survival and other time-to-event end points. Response rates were similar in the two groups (88.5% in the obinutuzumab group and 86.9% in the rituximab group). Adverse events of grade 3 to 5 were more frequent in the obinutuzumab group than in the rituximab group (74.6% vs. 67.8%), as were serious adverse events (46.1% vs. 39.9%). The rates of adverse events resulting in death were similar in the two groups (4.0% in the obinutuzumab group and 3.4% in the rituximab group). The most common adverse events were infusion-related events that were considered by the investigators to be largely due to obinutuzumab in 353 of 595 patients (59.3%; 95% CI, 55.3 to 63.2) and to rituximab in 292 of 597 patients (48.9%; 95% CI, 44.9 to 52.9; P<0.001). Nausea and neutropenia were common. A total of 35 patients (5.8%) in the obinutuzumab group and 46 (7.7%) in the rituximab group died. CONCLUSIONS: Obinutuzumab-based immunochemotherapy and maintenance therapy resulted in longer progression-free survival than rituximab-based therapy. High-grade adverse events were more common with obinutuzumab-based chemotherapy. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; GALLIUM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01332968 .).

First-line therapy with bendamustine/prednisone/bortezomib-A GMMG trial for non-transplant eligible symptomatic multiple myeloma patients.

OBJECTIVES: The German-speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group (GMMG) conducted this trial to investigate efficacy and safety of the three-drug combination bendamustine/prednisone/bortezomib (BPV) as first-line therapy for elderly patients with multiple myeloma (MM). METHODS: Elderly MM patients requiring first-line therapy and not eligible for intensive treatment were enrolled in this phase IIb multicenter study. Patients were treated with BPV regimen for a maximum of nine cycles. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were included in the trial with a median age of 76 years. Nineteen patients had renal impairment at baseline. The ORR was 78.8% for patients treated with 3 and more BPV cycles and 71.1% for all evaluable patients. The median progression-free survival was 25 months, and overall survival at 24 months was 83.3%. The clinical benefit rate including MR was 91.2%. In patients with renal impairment at baseline, a renal response was observed in 11 pts. with complete recovery of the renal function in six patients. The most frequent CTC grade 3/4 AEs experienced by patients were hematological (17.5%) and infectious (9.8%) complications. No new safety signals were observed for the study drugs under investigation. CONCLUSIONS: Bendamustine/prednisone/bortezomib may serve as a first-line regimen for transplant-ineligible elderly MM patients in particular for patients with renal impairment requiring a fast and durable renal response.

Imatinib dose reduction in major molecular response of chronic myeloid leukemia: results from the German Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-Study IV.

Standard first-line therapy of chronic myeloid leukemia is treatment with imatinib. In the randomized German Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-Study IV, more potent BCR-ABL inhibition with 800 mg ('high-dose') imatinib accelerated achievement of a deep molecular remission. However, whether and when a de-escalation of the dose intensity under high-dose imatinib can be safely performed without increasing the risk of losing deep molecular response is unknown. To gain insights into this clinically relevant question, we analyzed the outcome of imatinib dose reductions from 800 mg to 400 mg daily in the Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-Study IV. Of the 422 patients that were randomized to the 800 mg arm, 68 reduced imatinib to 400 mg after they had achieved at least a stable major molecular response. Of these 68 patients, 61 (90%) maintained major molecular remission on imatinib at 400 mg. Five of the seven patients who lost major molecular remission on the imatinib standard dose regained major molecular remission while still on 400 mg imatinib. Only two of 68 patients had to switch to more potent kinase inhibition to regain major molecular remission. Importantly, the lengths of the intervals between imatinib high-dose treatment before and after achieving major molecular remission were associated with the probabilities of maintaining major molecular remission with the standard dose of imatinib. Taken together, the data support the view that a deep molecular remission achieved with high-dose imatinib can be safely maintained with standard dose in most patients. Study protocol registered at clinicaltrials.gov 00055874.

Bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone with or without continuous low-dose oral cyclophosphamide for primary refractory or relapsed multiple myeloma: a randomized phase III study.

This phase III, open-label, randomized, controlled study aimed to evaluate the benefit of adding continuous low-dose oral cyclophosphamide to bortezomib-dexamethasone in patients with primary relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive up to eight 3-week cycles of bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) and dexamethasone (20 mg; VD; n = 48) or bortezomib-dexamethasone plus oral cyclophosphamide (50 mg; VCD; n = 48). Median time to progression (primary endpoint) was slightly longer in the VD versus VCD group (12.6 vs 9.9 months, P = 0.192), and the hazard ratio for disease progression was in favor of VD (hazard ratio = 0.71, 95% confidence interval = 0.43-1.19, P = 0.196). The overall response rate was 74% with VD and 70% with VCD. Most adverse events were similar in frequency between arms; however, grade ≥ 3 peripheral neuropathy was more frequent in the VCD versus VD arm (15 vs 4%). Infection rate was higher in the VCD arm (64 vs 52%); however, grade ≥3 infection rates were comparable (19 vs 17%). Further trials are needed to determine whether addition of cyclophosphamide to VD at a different dose/schedule confers clinical benefit. This study was terminated prematurely, with insufficient sample size to adequately compare the arms; the results should, therefore, be considered descriptive. This trial is registered: EudraCT Number 2008-003213-27; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00813150.

First-line chemoimmunotherapy with bendamustine and rituximab versus fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL10): an international, open-label, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab is the standard therapy for physically fit patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. This international phase 3 study compared the efficacy and tolerance of the standard therapy with a potentially less toxic combination consisting of bendamustine and rituximab. METHODS: Treatment-naive fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (aged 33-81 years) without del(17p) were enrolled after undergoing a central screening process. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a computer-generated randomisation list using randomly permuted blocks with a block size of eight and were stratified according to participating country and Binet stage. Patients were allocated to receive six cycles of intravenous fludarabine (25 mg/m(2) per day) and cyclophosphamide (250 mg/m(2) per day) for the first 3 days or to intravenous bendamustine (90 mg/m(2) per day) for the first 2 days of each cycle. Rituximab 375 mg/m(2) was given intravenously in both groups on day 0 of cycle 1 and subsequently was given at 500 mg/m(2) during the next five cycles on day 1. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival with the objective to assess non-inferiority of bendamustine and rituximab to the standard therapy. We aimed to show that the 2-year progression-free survival with bendamustine and rituximab was not 67·5% or less with a corresponding non-inferiority margin of 1·388 for the hazard ratio (HR) based on the 90·4% CI. The final analysis was done by intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT%2000769522. FINDINGS: 688 patients were recruited between Oct 2, 2008, and July 11, 2011, of which 564 patients who met inclusion criteria were randomly assigned. 561 patients were included in the intention-to-treat population: 282 patients in the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab group and 279 in the bendamustine and rituximab group. After a median observation time of 37·1 months (IQR 31·0-45·5) median progression-free survival was 41·7 months (95% CI 34·9-45·3) with bendamustine and rituximab and 55·2 months (95% CI not evaluable) with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (HR 1·643, 90·4% CI 1·308-2·064). As the upper limit of the 90·4% CI was greater than 1·388 the null hypothesis for the corresponding non-inferiority hypothesis was not rejected. Severe neutropenia and infections were more frequently observed with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (235 [84%] of 279 vs 164 [59%] of 278, and 109 [39%] vs 69 [25%], respectively) during the study. The increased frequency of infectious complications with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab was more pronounced in patients older than 65 years. INTERPRETATION: The combination of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab remains the standard front-line therapy in fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, but bendamustine and rituximab is associated with less toxic effects. FUNDING: Roche Pharma AG, Mundipharma, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Palliative treatment of colorectal cancer with secondary metastasis resection in Germany - impact of the multidisciplinary treatment approach on prognosis and cost: the Northern Bavaria IVOPAK I Project.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of care and interdisciplinary cooperation in the palliative treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC), including the associated costs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 103 patients were enrolled from 13 institutions to reflect the existing clinical treatment reality and costs of palliative CRC treatment. We present the clinical outcome of the patients and compare the results obtained in the 3 centers with double-figure recruitment numbers (centers A, B, and C). RESULTS: First-line treatment with 5-fluorouracil monotherapy was applied in exceptional cases. The regular treatment method comprised either an irinotecan- (30%) or an oxaliplatin-based regimen (32%). Biological agents were added to the treatment of 33 patients (32%). The median overall survival (OS) of the total patient collective was 25 months. The OS differed significantly in 2 out of the 3 centers, ranging between 27 and 11 months. Secondary metastasis resections were performed in 26% of the total patient collective. The center with the most favorable outcome results also had the lowest costs for palliative treatment and care, including the lowest drug costs. CONCLUSION: A combined chemotherapy treatment was the rule. Concerning biological agents, a significant lack of their application in first-line treatment and the quality of interdisciplinary cooperation have to be addressed.

Older patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (≥65 years) profit more from higher imatinib doses than younger patients: a subanalysis of the randomized CML-Study IV.

The impact of imatinib dose on response rates and survival in older patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase has not been studied well. We analyzed data from the German CML-Study IV, a randomized five-arm treatment optimization study in newly diagnosed BCR-ABL-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase. Patients randomized to imatinib 400 mg/day (IM400) or imatinib 800 mg/day (IM800) and stratified according to age (≥65 years vs. <65 years) were compared regarding dose, response, adverse events, rates of progression, and survival. The full 800 mg dose was given after a 6-week run-in period with imatinib 400 mg/day. The dose could then be reduced according to tolerability. A total of 828 patients were randomized to IM400 or IM800. Seven hundred eighty-four patients were evaluable (IM400, 382; IM800, 402). One hundred ten patients (29 %) on IM400 and 83 (21 %) on IM800 were ≥65 years. The median dose per day was lower for patients ≥65 years on IM800, with the highest median dose in the first year (466 mg/day for patients ≥65 years vs. 630 mg/day for patients <65 years). Older patients on IM800 achieved major molecular remission and deep molecular remission as fast as younger patients, in contrast to standard dose imatinib with which older patients achieved remissions much later than younger patients. Grades 3 and 4 adverse events were similar in both age groups. Five-year relative survival for older patients was comparable to that of younger patients. We suggest that the optimal dose for older patients is higher than 400 mg/day. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00055874

Superior outcomes associated with complete response in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients treated with nonintensive therapy: analysis of the phase 3 VISTA study of bortezomib plus melphalan-prednisone versus melphalan-prednisone.

The phase 3 Velcade as Initial Standard Therapy in Multiple Myeloma: Assessment with Melphalan and Prednisone study in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients ineligible for high-dose therapy demonstrated that bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) was superior to melphalan-prednisone across all efficacy end points. We assessed the prognostic impact of response on time-to-event parameters in the intent-to-treat population. Patients received nine 6-week cycles of treatment. Time to progression, time to next therapy, and treatment-free interval were associated with quality of response. When European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria were used, complete response (CR) was associated with significantly longer time to progression (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.45, P = .004), time to next therapy (HR = 0.46, P = .0004), and treatment-free interval (HR = 0.38, P < .0001) versus partial response, but there was no significant difference in overall survival (HR = 0.87, P = .54); similar differences were seen with CR versus very good partial response by uniform criteria. Quality of response improved with prolonged VMP treatment, with 28% of CRs achieved during cycles 5-9. CR duration appeared similar among patients with "early" (cycles 1-4) and "late" CRs (cycles 5-9) and among patients receiving 9 versus < 9 cycles of bortezomib within VMP. These results highlight that CR is an important treatment goal and support prolonged VMP therapy to achieve maximal response. This study is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00111319.

Deferasirox treatment of iron-overloaded chelation-naïve and prechelated patients with myelodysplastic syndromes in medical practice: results from the observational studies eXtend and eXjange.

EXtend and eXjange were prospective, 1-yr, non-interventional, observational, multicentre studies that investigated deferasirox, a once-daily oral iron chelator, in iron-overloaded chelation-naïve and prechelated patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), respectively, treated in the daily-routine setting of office-based physicians. No inclusion or exclusion criteria or additional monitoring procedures were applied. Deferasirox was administered as recommended in the European Summary of Product Characteristics. Haematological parameters and adverse events (AEs) were collected at two-monthly intervals. Data from 123 chelation-naïve patients with MDS (mean age 70.4 yrs) with median baseline serum ferritin level of 2679 (range 184-16,500) ng/mL, and 44 prechelated patients with MDS (mean age 69.6 yrs) with median baseline serum ferritin level of 2442 (range 521-8565) ng/mL, were assessed. The mean prescribed daily dose of deferasirox at the first visit was 15.7 and 18.7 mg/kg/d, respectively. Treatment with deferasirox produced a significant reduction in median serum ferritin levels in chelation-naïve patients with MDS from 2679 to 2000 ng/mL (P = 0.0002) and a pronounced decrease in prechelated patients with MDS from 2442 to 2077 ng/mL (P = 0.06). The most common drug-related AEs were gastrointestinal, increased serum creatinine levels and rash. These studies demonstrate that deferasirox used in physicians' medical practices is effective in managing iron burden in transfusion-dependent patients with MDS.

Characterization of haematological parameters with bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone versus melphalan-prednisone in newly diagnosed myeloma, with evaluation of long-term outcomes and risk of thromboembolic events with use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents: analysis of the VISTA trial.

Although haematological toxicities, such as anaemia, are common in multiple myeloma (MM), no clear consensus exists on the use and impact of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) on outcomes in MM. This analysis characterizes haematological toxicities and associated interventions in the phase III VISTA (Velcade(®) as Initial Standard Therapy in Multiple Myeloma: Assessment with Melphalan and Prednisone) study of bortezomib plus melphalan/prednisone (VMP, n = 344) versus MP (n = 338) in previously untreated MM patients ineligible for high-dose therapy, and evaluates the impact of ESA use or red-blood-cell (RBC) transfusions on outcomes and thromboembolic risk. Incidence of haematological toxicities was similar with VMP and MP; similar rates of interventions and associated complications (e.g. bleeding, febrile neutropenia) were observed. Two hundred thirty three patients received ESA; 204 had RBC transfusions. Frequency of thromboembolic events was low and not affected by ESA use. Median time-to progression (TTP) was similar between ESA/non-ESA [hazard ratio: 1·03 (95% confidence interval 0·76-1·39); P = 0·8478] in both arms (VMP: 19·9/not reached; MP: 15·0/17·5 months). Three-year overall survival (OS) rates were similar between ESA/non-ESA in each arm. Patients receiving RBC transfusions had significantly shorter OS (P < 0·0001) versus non-RBC-transfusion patients. In conclusion, bortezomib did not add to melphalan haematological toxicity. Concomitant ESA use with VMP/MP in previously untreated MM patients did not adversely affect TTP or OS, or increase thromboembolic risk. However, RBC transfusion was associated with significantly shorter survival.

Bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: The standard treatment for patients with multiple myeloma who are not candidates for high-dose therapy is melphalan and prednisone. This phase 3 study compared the use of melphalan and prednisone with or without bortezomib in previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma who were ineligible for high-dose therapy. METHODS: We randomly assigned 682 patients to receive nine 6-week cycles of melphalan (at a dose of 9 mg per square meter of body-surface area) and prednisone (at a dose of 60 mg per square meter) on days 1 to 4, either alone or with bortezomib (at a dose of 1.3 mg per square meter) on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, and 32 during cycles 1 to 4 and on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 during cycles 5 to 9. The primary end point was the time to disease progression. RESULTS: The time to progression among patients receiving bortezomib plus melphalan-prednisone (bortezomib group) was 24.0 months, as compared with 16.6 months among those receiving melphalan-prednisone alone (control group) (hazard ratio for the bortezomib group, 0.48; P<0.001). The proportions of patients with a partial response or better were 71% in the bortezomib group and 35% in the control group; complete-response rates were 30% and 4%, respectively (P<0.001). The median duration of the response was 19.9 months in the bortezomib group and 13.1 months in the control group. The hazard ratio for overall survival was 0.61 for the bortezomib group (P=0.008). Adverse events were consistent with established profiles of toxic events associated with bortezomib and melphalan-prednisone. Grade 3 events occurred in a higher proportion of patients in the bortezomib group than in the control group (53% vs. 44%, P=0.02), but there were no significant differences in grade 4 events (28% and 27%, respectively) or treatment-related deaths (1% and 2%). CONCLUSIONS: Bortezomib plus melphalan-prednisone was superior to melphalan-prednisone alone in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma who were ineligible for high-dose therapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00111319.)

Risk factors for, and reversibility of, peripheral neuropathy associated with bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma: subanalysis of the phase 3 VISTA study.

OBJECTIVES: This subanalysis of the phase 3 VISTA trial aimed to assess the frequency, characteristics and reversibility of, and prognostic factors for, bortezomib-associated peripheral neuropathy (PN) in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma ineligible for high-dose therapy who received bortezomib plus melphalan-prednisone. METHODS: Patients received nine 6-wk cycles of VMP (bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2), days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, 32, cycles 1-4, and days 1, 8, 22, 29, cycles 5-9; melphalan 9 mg/m(2), days 1-4, cycles 1-9; and prednisone 60 mg/m(2), days 1-4, cycles 1-9). RESULTS: Overall, 47% of patients receiving VMP developed PN, including 19% grade 2 and 13% grade ≥ 3 (<1% grade 4). The PN incidence was dose-related and reached a plateau at a cumulative bortezomib dose of approximately 45 mg/m(2). Median time to PN onset was 2.3 months. Bortezomib-associated PN was reversible; 79% of events improved by at least one NCI CTCAE grade within a median of 1.9 months and 60% completely resolved within a median of 5.7 months, with reversibility similar in responding and non-responding patients. By multivariate analysis, baseline neuropathy was the only consistent risk factor for any PN [hazard ratio (HR) 1.785, P=0.0065], grade ≥ 2 PN (HR 2.205, P=0.0032), and grade ≥ 3 PN (HR 2.438, P=0.023); age, pre-existing diabetes, International Staging System stage, obesity, and creatinine clearance did not affect the overall rate of PN. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of bortezomib-induced PN in the frontline setting were similar to those in relapsed patients and resolved in most cases.

Fewer bone disease events, improvement in bone remodeling, and evidence of bone healing with bortezomib plus melphalan-prednisone vs. melphalan-prednisone in the phase III VISTA trial in multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES: Bone disease is a key presenting feature of myeloma. This post hoc analysis of the phase III VISTA trial of bortezomib plus melphalan-prednisone (VMP) vs. MP in previously untreated myeloma patients assessed clinical bone disease events and changes in alkaline phosphatase (ALP), a marker for osteoblast activation, and serum Dickkopf-1 (DKK-1), an inhibitor of osteoblast differentiation, during treatment. METHODS: Patients received nine 6-wk cycles of VMP (bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) , days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, 32, cycles 1-4, days 1, 8, 22, 29, cycles 5-9, plus melphalan 9mg/m(2) and prednisone 60mg/m(2) , days 1-4, cycles 1-9; N=344) or MP alone (N=338). RESULTS: Rates of bisphosphonates use during treatment (73% vs. 82%), progression because of worsening bone disease (3% vs. 11%), and requirement for subsequent radiotherapy (3% vs. 8%) were lower with VMP vs. MP. Median maximum ALP increase was significantly higher with VMP vs. MP overall (49.7% vs. 30.3%, P=0.029), and higher by response group (complete response [CR]: 68.7% vs. 43.9%; partial response [PR]: 41.5% vs. 31.2%). Greater maximum ALP increase was strongly associated with achievement of CR (P≤0.0001) and CR/PR (P≤0.01). Median DKK-1 decreased with VMP by 694.4pg/mL and increased with MP by 1273.3pg/mL from baseline to day 4 (P=0.0069). Available radiologic data revealed evidence of bone healing in 6/11 VMP-treated patients, who achieved best responses of three CR, one PR, and two stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest a positive effect of bortezomib on bone metabolism and potentially bone healing in myeloma.

Rituximab Maintenance Versus Observation After Immunochemotherapy (R-CHOP, R-MCP, and R-FCM) in Untreated Follicular Lymphoma Patients: A Randomized Trial of the Ostdeutsche Studiengruppe Hämatologie und Onkologie and the German Low-Grade Lymphoma Study Group.

The German study groups, the German Low-Grade Lymphoma Study Group (GLSG) and Ostdeutsche Studiengruppe Hämatologie und Onkologie (OSHO), initiated in 2007 a double randomized trial to investigate efficacy and safety of rituximab maintenance versus observation in remission after randomly assigned induction treatment in the first-line follicular lymphoma. Previously untreated patients with stage II-IV follicular lymphoma in need of therapy were randomized to receive 6 cycles of R-CHOP, R-MCP, or R-FCM. Responding patients were subsequently randomized to 2 years rituximab maintenance or observation, stratified by type of immunochemotherapy, quality of remission, and Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI). Recruitment was stopped in 2011 after the PRIMA results had been published. Median age of the 206 recruited patients was 66 years (range, 24-86), and (FLIPI) was low in 13%, intermediate in 28%, and high in 60%. High and comparable overall response rates were observed after R-CHOP (88%), R-MCP (89%), and R-FCM (91%). Rituximab maintenance substantially prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in comparison to observation in remission (hazard ratio 0.39, P = 0.0064). In the rituximab maintenance group, the 3-year PFS was 89% compared with 69% in the observation group. No differences in overall survival were observed for maintenance vs. observation (hazard ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.32-3.43, P = 0.95). In this randomized trial, 2 years of rituximab maintenance was associated with significantly prolonged PFS in comparison to observation after response to first-line immunochemotherapy in follicular lymphoma. Our data represent an independent confirmation of the PRIMA trial results. (Clinical Trial EudraCT Number: 2005-005473-29, 2006-09-26).

Anagrelide for the treatment of thrombocythaemia in daily clinical practice: a post-marketing observational survey on efficacy and safety performed in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Myeloproliferative diseases - in particular essential thrombocythaemia (ET) - may be associated with increases in platelet count which put patients at risk of life-threatening complications such as thromboses and severe bleedings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicentre post-marketing observational survey was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of anagrelide under daily practice conditions in at-risk patients with ET who received anagrelide for the first time. RESULTS: 198 patients (median age of 64 years, range 19-88 years) were included, 61.1% of the patients were women. The mean observation time was 6.2 +/- 1.7 months. Treatment with anagrelide lowered the platelet counts by a median of 316 x 10(9)/l from a median of 797 x 10(9)/l at the beginning of the observation to 470 x 10(9)/l at the last observation (log rank test, p < 0.001). Disease-related complications were reduced during treatment compared to 6 months prior to treatment (transient ischaemic attacks from 1.5 to 0.5%; thromboses from 7.6 to 0%). The number of bleedings remained the same at 1.5%. Adverse events were documented in 46 patients (23.2%). All observed adverse events were similar to those previously reported in clinical studies. CONCLUSION: Anagrelide was effective in lowering the platelet count and was also well tolerated when used in daily clinical practice.