Assessment of prolonged proteasome inhibition through ixazomib-based oral regimen on newly diagnosed and first-relapsed multiple myeloma: A real-world Chinese cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and convenience of in-class transition (iCT) from intravenous bortezomib-based induction to ixazomib-based oral regimens. METHODS: This retrospective real-world study was conducted in 16 Chinese hospitals between October 2017 and April 2023 and analyzed newly diagnosed (NDMM) and first-line relapsed multiple myeloma (FRMM) patients who attained at least a partial response from bortezomib-based induction therapy, followed by an ixazomib-based oral regimen for 2 year or until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. RESULTS: The study enrolled 199 patients, median age: 63 years old, male 55.4%, 53% as high risk (HR), and 47% as standard risk. Cytogenetic risk stratification by metaphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (M-FISH), based on the Mayo Clinic risk stratification system. The median duration of total PI therapy was 11 months, with ixazomib-based treatment spanning 6 months. At the 20-month median follow-up, 53% of patients remained on therapy. The 24-month PFS rate was 84.3% from the initiation of bortezomib-based induction and 83.4% from the start of ixazomib-based treatment. Overall response rate (ORR) was 100% post-bortezomib induction and 90% following 6 cycles of the ixazomib-based regimen. Based on the Sankey diagrams, 89.51% of patients maintained or improved their disease response after 2 cycles of iCT, 6 cycles (90.14%), and 12 cycles (80%). The HR level of Mayo was found to be a significant independent factor in a worse remission (hazard ratio (HR) 2.55; p = 0.033). Ixazomib's safety profile aligned with previous clinical trial data, with 49% of patients experiencing at least one AE of any grade. The most common AEs included peripheral neuropathy, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, thrombocytopenia, and granulocytopenia. CONCLUSION: In the real-world Chinese MM population, NDMM and FRMM patients responded favorably to PI-based continuous therapy, demonstrating substantial response rates. The ixazomib-based iCT allows for sustained PI-based treatment, offering promising efficacy and tolerable AEs.

Carfilzomibe para o tratamento de pacientes com mieloma múltiplo recidivado ou refratário que receberam uma terapia prévia / Carfilzomibe for the treatment of patients with myeloma multiple recurrence or refractory that receives a therapy previous

INTRODUÇÃO: O mieloma múltiplo (MM) é uma neoplasia hematológica maligna caracterizada pela proliferação descontrolada de plasmócitos alterados na medula óssea, resultando na produção aumentada de imunoglobulinas não funcional (proteína monoclonal). O acúmulo destas imunoglobulinas e a interação dos plasmócitos com outras células da medula óssea resultam em anemia, lesões ósseas, infecções, hipercalcemia, injúria renal, fadiga e dor. A incidência mundial informada pelo Globocan é de 2,2 novos casos por 100.000 habitantes em homens e 1,5/100.000 em mulheres, com ocorrência, a nível mundial, de 176 mil novos casos e 117 mil mortes em 2020. Carfilzomibe é um agente antineoplásico, inibidor de proteassoma que se liga seletiva e irreversivelmente nos sítios ativos. Tem atividade antiproliferativa e próapoptóticas. PERGUNTA: Kyprolis® (carfilzomibe) em combinação com dexametasona é eficaz e seguro no tratamento de pacientes com mieloma múltiplo recidivado ou refratário que receberam uma terapia prévia quando em comparação a bortezomibe, ciclofosfamida, dexametasona, cisplatina, doxorrubicina, doxorrubicina li

Comparison of health care costs and resource utilization for commonly used proteasome inhibitor-immunomodulatory drug-based triplet regimens for the management of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Economic differences among currently available proteasome inhibitors (PI)-based lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd)-backbone triplet regimens-ixazomib (I), bortezomib (V), and carfilzomib (K) plus Rd-remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To assess health care resource utilization (HCRU) and health care costs of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the United States treated with IRd, VRd, and KRd. METHODS: This retrospective longitudinal cohort study using IQVIA PharMetrics Plus adjudicated claims US data (January 1, 2015, to September 30, 2020) included adult patients with all available data who initiated IRd, VRd, or KRd in second line of therapy or later (LOT2+) on or after September 1, 2015. The index date was the treatment initiation date for each LOT (multiple LOTs per patient were included) and the baseline was 6 months pre-index. MM-related and all-cause HCRU/costs were assessed during follow-up and reported per patient per month (PPPM; 2020 US Dollars). For MM-related costs only, treatment administration costs were excluded from outpatient (OP) costs and instead summed with pharmacy costs. HCRU/costs were compared between treatment groups using generalized linear models (GLMs). Cost variables were compared using 2-part models and GLM with log transformation and γ distribution. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) adjusted for imbalance of baseline confounders across treatment groups. RESULTS: The study included 511 patients contributing 542 LOTs (IRd: n = 153; VRd: n = 262; KRd: n = 127). Before IPTW, mean observed time spent on therapy was 8.5, 9.3, and 7.3 months for the IRd, VRd, and KRd cohorts, respectively. During follow-up and after IPTW, IRd and VRd were associated with significantly fewer OP visits vs KRd. Post-IPTW comparisons of MM-related costs for IRd vs KRd yielded lower OP costs for IRd (mean diff. PPPM: -$3,428; P < 0.001), contributing to lower total medical costs (-$3,813; P < 0.001) and total health care cost savings with IRd vs KRd (-$5,813; P = 0.001). MM-related OP costs were lower for VRd (mean diff. PPPM: -$3,543; P < 0.001) than KRd, reducing its total MM-related medical costs (-$3,997; P = 0.002), leading to total MM-related health care cost savings with VRd vs KRd (-$12,357; P < 0.001). All-cause cost comparisons yielded similar results (total health care cost savings for IRd and VRd vs KRd: -$6,371 and -$13,629, respectively; all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: From the US insurance-payer perspective, patients treated with IRd and VRd had significant medical cost savings vs KRd due to lower OP costs when excluding treatment administration costs. The differential economic impacts of PI-Rd regimens in this study may help to inform treatment decisions for patients with MM. DISCLOSURES: This study and article were supported by Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc. Dr Sanchez has no conflicts to declare. Dr Chari has the following relationships: Research Support/Principal Investigator: Amgen, Array Biopharma, Celgene, Glaxo Smith Klein, Janssen, Millenium/Takeda, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Oncoceutics, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics; Consultant: Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Millenium/Takeda, Janssen, Karyopharm; Scientific Advisory Board: Amgen, Celgene, Millenium/Takeda, Janssen, Karyopharm, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics. Drs Cherepanov, Huang, Dabora, and Noga are current employees of Takeda, while Drs Stull and Young are ex-employees of Takeda; Drs Cherepanov and Huang also own stocks in Takeda. Dr DerSarkissian, Ms Cheng, Ms Zhang, Mr Banatwala, and Dr Duh are employees of Analysis Group, Inc. (AG), a consulting firm that received funding from Takeda to conduct this study. Ms Pi was an employee of AG at the time of the study. Dr Ailawadhi has the following relationships to declare: Research Support and Consulting for BMS, GSK, and Janssen; Research Support from AbbVie, Arch Oncology, Cellectar, Medimmune, Pharmacyclics, and Xencor; Consulting for Beigene, Oncopeptides, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Takeda.

Carfilzomibe no tratamento de pacientes com mieloma múltiplo recidivado ou refratário, que receberam terapia prévia / Carfilzomib in the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who have received prior therapy

INTRODUÇÃO: O mieloma múltiplo (MM) é uma neoplasia hematológica maligna caracterizada pela proliferação descontrolada de plasmócitos alterados na medula óssea, resultando na produção aumentada de imunoglobulinas não funcional (proteína monoclonal). O acúmulo destas imunoglobulinas e a interação dos plasmócitos com outras células da medula óssea resultam em anemia, lesões ósseas, infecções, hipercalcemia, injúria renal, fadiga e dor. A incidência mundial informada pelo Globocan é de 2,2 novos casos por 100.000 habitantes em homens e 1,5/100.000 em mulheres, com ocorrência, a nível mundial, de 176 mil novos casos e 117 mil mortes em 2020. Carfilzomibe é um agente antineoplásico, inibidor de proteassoma que se liga seletiva e irreversivelmente nos sítios ativos. Tem atividade antiproliferativa e pró-apoptóticas. PERGUNTA DE PESQUISA: Kyprolis® (carfilzomibe) em combinação com dexametasona é eficaz e seguro no tratamento de pacientes com mieloma múltiplo recidivado ou refratário que receberam uma terapia prévia quando em comparação a bortezomibe, ciclofosfamida, dexametasona, cisplatina, doxorrubicina, doxorrubicina lipossomal, etoposídeo, melfalana, vincristina ou talidomida? EVIDÊNCIAS CLÍNICAS: O demandante realizou as buscas na literatura utilizando as seguintes bases de dados: The Cochrane Library, Medline via PubMed, Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS), Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), o que resultou na inclusão de 14 publicações. Na análise conduzida pela Secretaria Executiva foram consideradas 12 publicações referentes a um ensaio clínico randomizado e uma publicação de revisão sistemática. O estudo ENDEAVOR foi um ensaio clínico de fase III, multicêntrico, aberto, que incluiu 929 participantes randomizados para receber carfilzomibe+dexametasona ou bortezomibe+dexametasona. A mediana de SLP foi 18,7 meses (IC 95%, 15,6 a não estimável) no grupo que recebeu carfilzomibe comparado a 9,4 meses (IC 95%, 8,4 a 10,4) no grupo que recebeu bortezomibe, resultando em uma magnitude de benefício absoluto de 9,3 meses (HR 0,53 [IC95% 0,44 a 0,65]; p< 0,0001). A duração mediana de resposta foi 21,3 meses (IC95% 21,3 a não estimável) no grupo carfilzomibe e 10,4 meses (IC95% 9,3 a 13,8) no grupo bortezomibe. Em ambos os grupos, 98% dos participantes apresentaram eventos adversos (qualquer grau), sendo a anemia (43% versus 28%), diarreia (36,7% versus 40,6%) e febre (32,6% versus 15,4%) os eventos mais frequentes nos grupos carfilzomibe e bortezomibe, respectivamente. Os eventos adversos mais comuns grau 3 ou maior foram reportados em 81,9% dos participantes do grupo carfilzomibe (n=379) e 71,1% no grupo bortezomibe (n=324), sendo a anemia (17,3% no grupo carfilzomibe e 10,1% no grupo bortezomibe), hipertensão (14,9% versus 3,3%), trombocitopenia (12,5% versus 14,7%),os três eventos mais frequentes. Insuficiência cardíaca grau 3 ou superior, foi mais frequente no grupo carfilzomibe (6%) que no grupo bortezomibe (2%.). AVALIAÇÃO ECONÔMICA: O demandante apresentou uma análise de custo-efetividade. Na análise do cenário base, em um horizonte temporal de 30 anos, carfilzomibe acrescentou ganhos incrementais de 1,19 QALY, resultando em uma razão de custo utilidade incremental (RCEI) de R$ 195.310,00 por QALY. No cenário proposto pela Secretária-Executiva (horizonte temporal de 10 anos e valor de utilidade derivada do estudo ENDEAVOR), carfilzomibe gerou benefício de 0,63 QALY, com RCEI de R$ 365.830,00 por QALY. ANÁLISE DE IMPACTO ORÇAMENTÁRIO: Com o desconto apresentado pelo demandante, a incorporação de carfilzomibe ao SUS implica em custos adicionais ao sistema de saúde no montante de aproximadamente R$ 365 milhões em cinco anos. A principal limitação da análise foi a estimativa da população. MONITORAMENTO DO HORIZONTE TECNOLÓGICO: Foram identificadas 10 tecnologias potenciais para compor o esquema terapêutico de pacientes adultos com mieloma múltiplo recidivado ou refratário: Belantamabe mafodotin, Ciltacabtageno autoleucel, Elranatamab, Iberdomida, Idecabtagene vicleucel, Isatuximabe, nivolumabe, selinexor, teclistamab, venetoclax. Tais medicamentos são anticorpo monoclonal ligado a um antineoplásico, anticorpo biespecífico, anticorpo monoclonal, imumodulador, terapias baseadas em células T autólogas geneticamente modificadas (CAR-T), inibidor SINE, ou inibidor de Bcl-2. A maioria não possui registro na FDA, EMA ou Anvisa. CONSIDERAÇÕES FINAIS: Os resultados sugerem eficácia e segurança do carfilzomibe na população elegível, porém, no horizonte temporal de 10 anos, com QALY < 1, RCEI de R$ 365.830,00 por QALY e impacto orçamentário de aproximadamente R$ 17 milhões no primeiro ano de incorporação e R$ 131 milhões no 5º ano da incorporação, totalizando R$ 365 milhões em cinco anos. RECOMENDAÇÃO PRELIMINAR DA CONITEC: Os membros do Plenário presentes na 109ª Reunião Ordinária da Conitec, realizada no dia 08 de junho de 2022, sem nenhuma declaração de conflito de interesse, deliberaram por unanimidade, encaminhar o tema para consulta pública com recomendação preliminar desfavorável à incorporação de carfilzomibe para o tratamento de mieloma múltiplo recidivado ou refratário no SUS. Os membros consideraram a evidência científica boa e favorável ao carfilzomibe, porém, a RCEI e o impacto orçamentário foram considerados muito altos para o tratamento de uma doença que já tem outras opções terapêuticas disponíveis no SUS. CONSULTA PÚBLICA: Entre os dias 08/07/2022 e 27/07/2022 foram recebidas 421 contribuições, sendo 152 pelo formulário para contribuições técnico-científicas e 269 pelo formulário para contribuições sobre experiência ou opinião de pacientes, familiares, amigos ou cuidadores de pacientes, profissionais de saúde ou pessoas interessadas no tema. A maioria foi a favor da incorporação de carfilzomibe no SUS (97% via formulário técnico-científico e 100%). O principal benefício apontado nas contribuições técnico-científicas foi sobre a eficácia, aumento da sobrevida e qualidade de vida, além da disponibilidade de mais uma opção terapêutica e promoção da igualdade no tratamento nos sistemas público e privado de saúde. A empresa detentora do registro do medicamento atualizou o preço do medicamento, e consequentemente os valores do impacto orçamentário e avaliação econômica. No impacto orçamentário o valor ficou em R$ 95,3 milhões em cinco anos. Nas contribuições de experiência e opinião, a totalidade dos respondentes discordou da recomendação preliminar da Conitec. No âmbito das opiniões e experiências positivas, foi mencionada a necessidade de garantir o acesso ao carfilzomibe, especialmente por representar uma alternativa para pacientes recidivados e refratários. Também foi citada a eficácia da tecnologia. Como dificuldades, destacou-se a falta de acesso pelo SUS. Em relação a outros medicamentos, foram mencionados benefícios, mas, também, a eficácia limitada no caso de pacientes recidivados. RECOMENDAÇÃO FINAL DA CONITEC: Os membros do Plenário da Conitec, em sua 112ª Reunião Ordinária, realizada no dia 31 de agosto de 2022, deliberaram por maioria simples, recomendar a não incorporação no SUS de carfilzomibe para o tratamento de pacientes com mieloma múltiplo recidivado ou refratário, que receberam terapia prévia, no SUS. Não houve apresentação de dados clínicos adicionais. Com o preço do medicamento atualizado, ainda assim não se mostrou custo-efetivo. Foi assinado o Registro de Deliberação nº 765/2022. DECISÃO: Não incorporar, no âmbito do Sistema Único de Saúde - SUS, o carfilzomibe para o tratamento de pacientes com mieloma múltiplo recidivado ou refratário, conforme a Portaria nº 107, publicada no Diário Oficial da União nº 184, seção 1, página 75, em 27 de setembro de 2022.

Real-world treatment patterns, healthcare use and costs in triple-class exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma patients in the USA.

Aim: To estimate treatment patterns and healthcare costs among triple-class exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients. Materials & methods: Eligible patients had ≥1 line of therapy (LOT) each of proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs and daratumumab in December 2015-September 2018 and received a new LOT. Results: A total of 154 patients were included with a median follow-up of 6.2 months. Median time from diagnosis to new LOT was 41.0 months. Kaplan-Meier estimate of median time to therapy discontinuation was 4.2 months. Mean per-patient, per-month MM-related costs were USD 35,657. Most frequently observed regimens were lenalidomide or pomalidomide + daratumumab (18.2%), lenalidomide or pomalidomide + proteasome inhibitors (15.6%) and lenalidomide or pomalidomide monotherapy (11.0%). Conclusion: Triple-class exposed RRMM patients receive heterogeneous treatments for a short duration with high healthcare resource utilization and costs.

Healthcare resource utilization and costs among patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma treated with proteasome inhibitors in real-world clinical practice in Germany.

AIMS: To assess the real-world healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with different proteasome inhibitors (PIs) for the treatment of patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in Germany. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective medical chart review of treatment patterns, outcomes, and HRU for patients with RRMM treated with bortezomib, carfilzomib, or ixazomib in second- or third-line (2L or 3L) therapy in Germany. Data were collected between 1 January 2017 and 30 June 2017. Costs were calculated based on drug prices and unit costs in Germany. RESULTS: Physicians provided data on 302 patients. Mean monthly total direct costs per patient receiving PI-based therapy were €7,925 and €10,693 for 2L and 3L, respectively, of which approximately 90% was anti-myeloma drug costs. Overall, the highest costs were associated with patients receiving 3L therapy. Regardless of treatment line, costs were higher for patients who had received a stem cell transplant (SCT) in a previous treatment line than for those who had not; the data suggest that this reflects the use of triplet regimens following a SCT. Patients with a complete response (CR) experienced no unplanned hospitalizations during the study period, whereas patients with progressive disease experienced the highest number of unplanned and planned hospitalizations. In 2L therapy, the highest proportion of patients with a CR was observed in those receiving carfilzomib (12% carfilzomib; 4% bortezomib; 0% ixazomib). LIMITATIONS: Patients with missing or incomplete follow-up data were included in the study and were accounted for using monthly cost estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-myeloma drugs were the main contributor to total HRU costs associated with RRMM in Germany. Improved treatment response was associated with lower costs and reduced hospitalizations.

Real-world treatment patterns, resource use and cost burden of multiple myeloma in Portugal.

OBJECTIVE: We provide a real-world overview of multiple myeloma (MM) treatment patterns, outcomes and healthcare resource use (HRU) in Portugal. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively from consecutive patients diagnosed/treated at the Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto (IPO-Porto) between 2012 and 2015. Primary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), with treatment patterns and HRU secondary. Analysis was by line of therapy (LOT), and post hoc by age (<65/≥65 years). RESULTS: 165, 73 and 32 patients received first, second and third LOTs respectively (N = 187). OS probabilities were 91.5%, 83.2% (<65 years) and 86.6%, 65.3% (≥65 years) at 12, 24 months respectively. PFS decreased from the start of each LOT for both age groups and was less for patients ≥65 years. Younger patients received more combination treatment (immunomodulatory drugs + proteasome inhibitors) and stem cell transplants, and had higher mean costs than older patients (€81,213 vs. €36,864 where three LOTs were received). Cost drivers were medications, transplantations and hospitalisations. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest divergence between younger and older MM patients. Older patients had lower OS and PFS probabilities, HRU costs and fewer stem cell transplantations. The treatment patterns in each LOT may differ from other countries' findings, suggesting treatment heterogeneity.

Ixazomib - the first oral proteasome inhibitor.

Ixazomib, as a proteasome inhibitor, inhibits the chymotrypsin-like activity of the ß5 subunit of the 20S proteasome. Based on the TOURMALINE-MM1 study, ixazomib was proved by the FDA as the orphan drug in November 2015. With a promising effect in prolonging the progression-free survival compared with placebo treatment (median: 20.6 versus 14.7 months), it was the first oral compound combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have received at least one prior therapy. The main adverse events include low-grade hematological, digestive, or cutaneous events, which were manageable with care. Overall, ixazomib demonstrated favorable safety profile. Ongoing trials are conducted to define its place in first-line, maintenance, and relapse therapies. In this review, we summarized the clinical pharmacology, efficacy, tolerability, safety, and cost-effectiveness of ixazomib.

Ixazomib for Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Review from an Evidence Review Group on a NICE Single Technology Appraisal.

Ixazomib is an oral proteasome inhibitor used in combination with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (IXA-LEN-DEX) and licensed for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. As part of a single technology appraisal (ID807) undertaken by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence, the Evidence Review Group, Warwick Evidence was invited to independently review the evidence submitted by the manufacturer of ixazomib, Takeda UK Ltd. The main source of clinical effectiveness data about IXA-LEN-DEX came from the Tourmaline-MM1 randomized controlled trial in which 771 patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma received either IXA-LEN-DEX or placebo-LEN-DEX as their second-, third-, or fourth-line treatment. Takeda estimated the cost effectiveness of IXA-LEN-DEX using a de-novo partitioned-survival model with three health states (pre-progression, post-progression, and dead). In their first submission, this model was used to estimate the cost effectiveness of IXA-LEN-DEX vs. bortezomib plus dexamethasone (BORT-DEX) in second-line treatment, and of IXA-LEN-DEX vs. LEN-DEX in third-line treatment. To estimate the relative clinical performance of IXA-LEN-DEX vs. BORT-DEX, Takeda conducted network meta-analyses for important outcomes. The network meta-analysis for overall survival was found to be flawed in several respects, but mainly because a hazard ratio input for one of the studies in the network had been inverted, resulting in a large inflation of the claimed superiority of IXA-LEN-DEX over BORT-DEX and a considerable overestimation of its cost effectiveness. In subsequent submissions, Takeda withdrew second-line treatment as an option for IXA-LEN-DEX. The manufacturer's first submission comparing IXA-LEN-DEX with LEN-DEX for third-line therapy employed Tourmaline-MM1 data from third- and fourth-line patients as proxy for a third-line population. The appraisal committee did not consider this reasonable because randomization in Tourmaline-MM1 was stratified according to one previous treatment and two or more previous treatments. A further deficiency was considered to be the manufacturer's use of interim survival data rather than the most mature data available. A second submission from the company focussed on IXA-LEN-DEX vs. LEN-DEX as third- or fourth-line treatment (the two or more previous lines population) and a new patient access scheme was introduced. Covariate modeling of survival outcomes was proposed using the most mature survival data. The Evidence Review Group's main criticisms of the new evidence included: the utility associated with the pre-progression health state was overestimated, treatment costs of ixazomib were underestimated, survival models were still associated with great uncertainty, leading to clinically implausible anomalies and highly variable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimates, and the company had not explored a strong assumption that the survival benefit of IXA-LEN-DEX over LEN-DEX would be fully maintained for a further 22 years beyond the observed data, which encompassed only approximately 2.5 years of observation. The appraisal committee remained unconvinced that ixazomib represented a cost-effective use of National Health Service resources. Takeda's third submission offered new base-case parametric models for survival outcomes, a new analysis of utilities, and proposed a commercial access agreement. In a brief critique of the third submission, the Evidence Review Group agreed that the selection of appropriate survival models was problematic and at the request of the National Institute for Health Care and Excellence investigated external sources of evidence regarding survival outcomes. The Evidence Review Group considered that some cost and utility estimates in the submission may have remained biased in favor of ixazomib. As a result of their third appraisal meeting, the committee judged that for the two to three prior therapies population, and at the price agreed in a commercial access agreement, ixazomib had the potential to be cost effective. It was referred to the Cancer Drugs Fund so that further data could accrue with the aim of diminishing the clinical uncertainties.

Integrated nonclinical and clinical risk assessment of the investigational proteasome inhibitor ixazomib on the QTc interval in cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Ixazomib is the first oral, proteasome inhibitor to reach phase III trials. Here, we present an integrated nonclinical and clinical assessment of ixazomib's effect on QTc intervals. METHODS: Nonclinical studies assessed (1) the in vitro binding of ixazomib to the hERG channel and (2) its effect on QT/QTc in dogs (N = 4) via telemetry. Pharmacokinetic-matched triplicate electrocardiograms were collected in four clinical phase I studies of intravenous (0.125-3.11 mg/m(2), N = 125, solid tumors/lymphoma) or oral (0.24-3.95 mg/m(2), N = 120, multiple myeloma) ixazomib. The relationship between ixazomib plasma concentration and heart rate (HR)-corrected QT using Fridericia (QTcF) or population (QTcP) methods was analyzed using linear mixed-effects models with fixed effects for day and time. RESULTS: In vitro binding potency for ixazomib to the hERG channel was weak (K i 24.9 µM; IC50 59.6 µM), and nonclinical telemetry studies showed no QT/QTc prolongation at doses up to 4.2 mg/m(2). In cancer patients, ixazomib, when evaluated at doses yielding various plasma concentrations (with 26 % of data greater than mean C max for the 4 mg phase 3 dose), had no meaningful effect on QTc based on model-predicted mean change in QTcF/QTcP from baseline. There was no relationship between ixazomib concentration and RR, suggesting no effect on HR. CONCLUSIONS: Ixazomib has no clinically meaningful effects on QTc or HR. Integrating preclinical data and concentration-QTc modeling of phase 1 data may obviate the need for a dedicated QTc study in oncology. A framework for QT assessment in oncology drug development is proposed.

Treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who are not eligible for stem cell transplantation: position statement of the myeloma foundation of Australia Medical and Scientific Advisory Group.

Options for treatment of elderly patients with multiple myeloma have expanded substantially following the development of immunomodulatory drugs (IMiD), proteasome inhibitors and with enhancement in safety of high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplant (HDT + ASCT). The recognition of biological heterogeneity among elderly patients has made delivery of therapy more challenging. An individualised approach to treatment selection is recommended in an era in which highly efficacious treatment options are available for transplant-ineligible patients. Here, we summarise recommendations for patients who are considered unsuitable for HDT + ASCT, including pretreatment considerations, and induction, maintenance and supportive care therapies.

Carfilzomib: a second-generation proteasome inhibitor for the treatment of multiple myeloma.

PURPOSE: The pharmacology, clinical efficacy, safety, cost, dosage and administration, and place in therapy of carfilzomib for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) are reviewed. SUMMARY: Proteasome inhibition in MM has become a cornerstone in treatment regimens. Carfilzomib, a second-generation proteasome inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy in patients with relapsed or refractory disease who have received at least two prior therapies including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory agent. Carfilzomib is an irreversible inhibitor and binds to a different site than bortezomib on the proteasome. A Phase II study evaluated 266 heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory MM who had received at least two prior therapies, including bortezomib and either thalidomide or lenalidomide. The overall response rate was 23.7%, with a median duration of response of 7.8 months. The median overall survival time was 15.6 months. Carfilzomib has a similar adverse-effect profile to bortezomib, including anemia, thrombocytopenia, fatigue, dyspnea, and nausea; however, it does not result in the development or worsening of peripheral neuropathy. Carfilzomib is infused intravenously over 2-10 minutes for 2 consecutive days every week for three out of four weeks, with a 12-day rest period. Dosing is based on the patient's actual body surface area. Carfilzomib is available in 60-mg vials for single infusion. The total cost for a year of therapy is approximately $155,852. CONCLUSION: Carfilzomib, a second-generation proteasome inhibitor that irreversibly inhibits the 26S proteasome, has shown efficacy in clinical studies of patients with relapsed or refractory MM, though the drug's role in the management of MM is not yet clear.

MG132 ameliorates kidney lesions by inhibiting the degradation of Smad7 in streptozotocin-induced diabetic nephropathy.

BACKGROUND: Smad7 is the main negative regulatory protein in the transforming growth factor-ß (TGF-ß) downstream signaling pathway, which plays an important role in diabetic nephropathy (DN) and may be related to the ubiquitin proteasome pathway (UPP). AIM: We investigated the role of UPP in regulating TGF-ß/SMAD signaling and explored the therapeutic effect of the ubiquitin proteasome inhibitor MG132 on DN. METHODS: Wistar rats were randomly divided into a diabetes group and a normal control group. Rats in the diabetes group were injected intraperitoneally with streptozotocin. Diabetic rats were then randomly divided into a diabetic nephropathy group (DN group), an MG132 high concentration (MH) group, and an MG132 low concentration (ML) group. After 8 weeks of treatment, 24-hour urinary microalbumin (UAlb), urinary protein/urinary creatinine (Up/Ucr) values, ALT, AST, Bcr, kidney damage, TGF-ß, Smad7, fibronectin (FN), and Smurf2 were detected. RESULTS: The body mass and Smad7 protein expression decreased in DN group, but kidney weight, kidney weight index, UAlb, Up/Ucr, FN and Smurf2 mRNA expression, and TGF-ß protein expression increased. However, these changes diminished following treatment with MG132, and a more pronounced effect was evident in MH group compared to ML group. CONCLUSION: MG132 alleviates kidney damage by inhibiting Smad7 ubiquitin degradation and TGF-ß activation in DN.