Bendamustine plus rituximab for the treatment of Waldenström Macroglobulinemia: Patient outcomes and impact of bendamustine dosing.

Bendamustine and rituximab (BR) therapy is commonly used in the treatment of Waldenström Macroglobulinemia (WM). The impact dose of Bendamustine dose on response and survival outcomes is not well-established, and the impact of its use in different treatment settings is not clear. We aimed to report response rates and survival outcomes following BR, and clarify the impact of depth of response and bendamustine dose on survival. A total of 250 WM patients treated with BR in the frontline or relapsed settings were included in this multicenter, retrospective cohort analysis. Rates of partial response (PR) or better differed significantly between the frontline and relapsed cohorts (91.4% vs 73.9%, respectively; p < 0.001). Depth of response impacted survival outcomes: two-year predicted PFS rates after achieving CR/VGPR vs PR were 96% versus 82%, respectively (p = 0.002). Total bendamustine dose was predictive of PFS: in the frontline setting, PFS was superior in the group receiving ≥1000 mg/m2 compared with those receiving 800-999 mg/m2 (p = 0.04). In the relapsed cohort, those who received doses of <600 mg/m2 had poorer PFS outcomes compared with those who received ≥600 mg/m2 (p = 0.02). Attaining CR/VGPR following BR results in superior survival, and total bendamustine dose significantly impacts response and survival outcomes, in both frontline and relapsed settings.

A mixed exercise training programme is feasible and safe and may improve quality of life and muscle strength in multiple myeloma survivors.

BACKGROUND: Exercise programmes are beneficial for cancer patients however evidence is limited in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), a cancer that is characterised by osteolytic bone disease, giving rise to high levels of bone morbidity including fractures and bone pain. METHODS: We conducted a single arm phase 2 study of an exercise programme (EP) as rehabilitation for treated MM patients, to evaluate feasibility, effects on QOL and physiological parameters. Patients were given individualised programmes, comprising stretching, aerobic and resistance exercises, carried out under supervision for 3 months then at home for a further 3 months. RESULTS: Study uptake was high, 60 of 75 (80%) patients approached consented to the study. Screen failures (11, due to fracture risk and disease relapse) and patient withdrawals (12) resulted in a final 37 patients enrolling on the programme. These 37 patients demonstrated high attendance rates in the supervised classes (87%), and high levels of adherence in home exercising (73%). Patients reported better QOL following the EP, with improvement in FACT-G and Fatigue scores over time from baseline (p<0.01 for both, one-way repeated measures ANOVA) to 6 months. Upper and lower limb strength also improved on the EP, from baseline to 6 months (p<0.01 for both). There were no adverse reactions. CONCLUSIONS: An EP in MM patients is feasible and safe, with high attendance and adherence. Benefits in QOL, fatigue and muscle strength await confirmation in randomized studies, prompting urgent evaluation of the benefits of EP in the rehabilitation of MM patients.