HHV8-Negative Effusion-Based Large B Cell Lymphoma Arising in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients under Dasatinib Treatment: A Report of Two Cases.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are the treatment of choice for BCR-ABL1-positive chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Although TKIs have substantially improved prognosis of CML patients, their use is not free of adverse effects. Dasatinib is a second generation TKI frequently associated with pleural effusion in up to 33% of patients. This results in symptoms as dyspnea, cough and chest pain that may require therapy discontinuation. In the present report, we describe two exceptional cases of HHV8-negative large B-cell effusion-based lymphoma (EBL) confined to the pleura, incidentally, diagnosed in patients presenting with dasatinib-related pleural effusion. One patient (case 1) is alive and is in remission at 17 months from large B-cell EBL diagnosis while unfortunately the other patient (case 2) died of progressive disease and COVID-19 pneumonia 16 months from large B-cell EBL diagnosis. These cases raise concern about a possible association between large B-cell EBL and dasatinib, and the different clinical outcome of the two cases poses a challenge in treatment decision. For this reason, we strongly recommend cytological investigation in patients with persistent/relapsing pleural effusion under dasatinib, primarily to validate its possible association with lymphoma development and to improve the knowledge about this entity.

Lenalidomide-based induction and maintenance in elderly newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients: updated results of the EMN01 randomized trial.

n the EMN01 trial, the addition of an alkylator (melphalan or cyclophosphamide) to lenalidomide-steroid induction therapy was prospectively evaluated in transplant-ineligible patients with multiple myeloma. After induction, patients were randomly assigned to maintenance treatment with lenalidomide alone or with prednisone continuously. The analysis presented here (median follow-up of 71 months) is focused on maintenance treatment and on subgroup analyses defined according to the International Myeloma Working Group Frailty Score. Of the 654 evaluable patients, 217 were in the lenalidomide-dexamethasone arm, 217 in the melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide arm and 220 in the cyclophosphamide-prednisone-lenalidomide arm. With regards to the Frailty Score, 284 (43%) patients were fit, 205 (31%) were intermediate-fit and 165 (25%) were frail. After induction, 402 patients were eligible for maintenance therapy (lenalidomide arm, n=204; lenalidomide-prednisone arm, n=198). After a median duration of maintenance of 22.0 months, progression-free survival from the start of maintenance was 22.2 months with lenalidomide-prednisone vs 18.6 months with lenalidomide (hazard ratio 0.85, P=0.14), with no differences across frailty subgroups. The most frequent grade ≥3 toxicity was neutropenia (10% of lenalidomide-prednisone and 21% of lenalidomide patients; P=0.001). Grade ≥3 non-hematologic adverse events were rare (<15%). In fit patients, melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared to cyclophosphamide-prednisone-lenalidomide (hazard ratio 0.72, P=0.05) and lenalidomide-dexamethasone (hazard ratio 0.72, P=0.04). Likewise, a trend towards a better overall survival was noted for patients treated with melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide or cyclophosphamide-prednisone-lenalidomide, as compared to lenalidomide-dexamethasone. No differences were observed in intermediate-fit and frail patients. This analysis showed positive outcomes of maintenance with lenalidomide-based regimens, with a good safety profile. For the first time, we showed that fit patients benefit from a full-dose triplet regimen, while intermediate-fit and frail patients benefit from gentler regimens. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT01093196.

Cost of illness in patients with multiple myeloma in Italy: the CoMiM study.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma is the second most common hematological cancer. Although it accounts for only a relatively small percentage of all cancer types, the costs associated with managing multiple myeloma are considerable. Available studies are mainly focused on health care costs. The Costo del Mieloma Multiplo (Cost of MM, CoMiM) study investigated the cost of illness of multiple myeloma in Italy during one year of disease management. METHODS: CoMiM is a retrospective, prevalence-based, multi-center, cross-sectional study based on a stratified sample of patients seen during normal clinical practice (asymptomatic; symptomatic on drugs; symptomatic receiving autologous stem cell transplantation; plateau/remission). Demographics, clinical history, health care and non-health care resource consumption data were collected. Costs were evaluated from the societal viewpoint and expressed in Euro 2008. RESULTS: Data on 236 patients were analyzed (39 asymptomatic, 17%; 29 symptomatic receiving autologous stem-cell transplantation, 12%; 105 symptomatic receiving drugs, 44%; 63 plateau/remission, 27%). The total cost of illness reached € 19,267.1 ± 25,078.6 (asymptomatic, € 959.3 ± 1091.6; symptomatic receiving drugs, € 21,707.8 ± 21,785.3; symptomatic receiving autologous stem-cell transplantation, € 59,243.7 ± 24,214.0; plateau/remission, € 8130.7 ± 15,092.5). The main cost drivers of total cost of illness were drugs and hospital admissions (46.1% and 29.4%, respectively). Antineoplastics and immunomodulators drove the cost of drugs (21.6% and 21.1% of the total cost of illness). Cost of antineoplastics was led by bortezomib (97.4%), whereas the cost driver for immunomodulators was lenalidomide (99.4%). Cost of hospitalization funded by the Italian National Health Service was strongly influenced by transplantation (94.6%), whereas chemotherapy and skeletal fractures did not exceed 1% and 2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some limitations, the CoMiM study provides Italian health care decision-makers with an insight into the stratified cost of illness of multiple myeloma patients.

Prognostic relevance of cytometric quantitative assessment in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes.

OBJECTIVES: Morphology and cytogenetics are currently used to define prognosis in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). However, these parameters have some limits. Flow cytometry has been recently included in the diagnostic panel for MDS, and its prognostic significance is under evaluation. METHODS: Marrow aspirates from 424 MDS patients were analyzed by flow cytometry to evaluate the impact of bone marrow cell immunophenotype on overall survival (OS) and leukemia-free survival (LFS). The immature compartment of myeloblasts was analyzed by the quantitative expression of CD34 (<3% vs. ≥3%), CD117, and CD11b(-) /CD66b(-) (<5% vs. ≥5%); myeloid maturation was analyzed by the expression of CD11b(+) /CD66b(++) (<15% vs. ≥15%) and CD11b(+) /CD66b(+) (<25% vs. ≥25%). RESULTS: In univariate analysis, the expression of immaturity markers (CD34(+) , CD117(+) , and CD11b(-) /CD66b(-) ) was associated with shorter LFS and OS (P < 0.0001); higher expression of differentiation markers (CD11b(+) /CD66b(++) and CD11b(+) /CD66b(+) ) was associated with longer LFS (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0002, respectively) and OS (P < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, expression of CD34(+) (P = 0.007), CD117(+) (P = 0.013), and CD11b(+) /CD66b(++) (P = 0.023) retained independent prognostic value for OS, while only the expression of CD34(+) was a prognostic factor for LFS (P = 0.0003). Two different risk groups were defined according to the presence of 0-1 or ≥2 of these factors with significant different LFS and OS (P < 0.0001). This score showed prognostic value in predicting survival even in subanalysis according to IPSS and WHO subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Flow cytometric analysis in MDS may provide meaningful prognostic information. Blast percentage expressed as CD117(+) or CD34(+) cells and the quantitative assessment of myeloid maturation showed prognostic value for survival.

Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone vs. lenalidomide plus melphalan and prednisone: a retrospective study in newly diagnosed elderly myeloma.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this retrospective study was to compare the efficacy and toxicity of lenalidomide-dexamethasone (len/dex) vs. melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) as upfront therapy for newly diagnosed elderly patients with myeloma. METHODS: Data from 51 patients enrolled in an Italian phase I/II trial and treated with MPR were analyzed and compared with data from 38 patients, seen at the Mayo Clinic, treated with len/dex and enrolled in phase II/III trials. RESULTS: On intention-to-treat analysis, time to progression (median: 24.7 vs. 27.5 months in MPR and len/dex groups, respectively, P = 0.903), progression-free survival (median: 24.7 vs. 27.5 months in MPR and len/dex groups, respectively, P = 0.926), and overall survival (2-yr overall survival: 86.2% in MPR vs. 89.1% in len/dex, P = 0.730) were not significantly different between the two groups. Results were confirmed when the analysis was restricted to MPR and len/dex matched pair mates. Hematologic grade 3-4 toxicities were more common with MPR (neutropenia: 66.7% vs. 21.1%, P < 0.001; thrombocytopenia: 31.4% vs. 2.6%, P < 0.001). Grade 3-4 gastrointestinal events (13.2% vs. 3.9%, P = 0.132), thrombotic events (13.2% vs. 5.9%, P = 0.279), and fatigue (10.5% vs. 3.9%, P = 0.395) were more common with len/dex. CONCLUSIONS: Results show that both MPR and len/dex are efficacious regimens for elderly patients with myeloma. Randomized trials are needed to confirm these results.

Bortezomib as induction before autologous transplantation, followed by lenalidomide as consolidation-maintenance in untreated multiple myeloma patients.

PURPOSE To evaluate the effect of bortezomib as induction therapy before autologous transplantation, followed by lenalidomide as consolidation-maintenance in myeloma patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Newly diagnosed patients age 65 to 75 years were eligible. Induction (bortezomib, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone [PAD]) included four 21-day cycles of bortezomib (1.3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11), pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (30 mg/m(2) on day 4), and dexamethasone (40 mg/d; cycle 1: days 1 to 4, 8 to 11, and 15 to 18; cycles 2 to 4: days 1 to 4). Autologous transplantation was tandem melphalan 100 mg/m(2) (MEL100) and stem-cell support. Consolidation included four 28-day cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg/d on days 1 to 21 every 28 days) plus prednisone (50 mg every other day), followed by maintenance with lenalidomide (LP-L; 10 mg/d on days 1 to 21) until relapse. Primary end points were safety (incidence of grade 3 to 4 adverse events [AEs]) and efficacy (response rate). Results A total of 102 patients were enrolled. In a per-protocol analysis, after PAD, 58% of patients had very good partial response (VGPR) or better, including 13% with complete response (CR); after MEL100, 82% of patients had at least VGPR and 38% had CR; and after LP-L, 86% of patients had at least VGPR and 66% had CR. After median follow-up time of 21 months, the 2-year progression-free survival rate was 69%, and the 2-year overall survival rate was 86%. During induction, treatment-related mortality was 3%; grade 3 to 4 AEs included thrombocytopenia (17%), neutropenia (10%), peripheral neuropathy (16%), and pneumonia (10%). During consolidation-maintenance, grade 3 to 4 AEs were neutropenia (16%), thrombocytopenia (6%), pneumonia (5%), and cutaneous rash (4%). CONCLUSION Bortezomib as induction before autologous transplantation, followed by lenalidomide as consolidation-maintenance, is an effective regimen.

Melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide for newly diagnosed myeloma: kinetics of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia and time-to-event results.

BACKGROUND: Initial analysis of the combination melphalan, prednisone, plus lenalidomide (MPR) showed significant antimyeloma activity in patients with untreated multiple myeloma, with neutropenia and thrombocytopenia as the most frequent side effects. This updated analysis reassessed the kinetics of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia as well as the safety and efficacy of MPR. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 21 patients with newly diagnosed myeloma received melphalan 0.18 mg/kg on days 1-4, prednisone 2 mg/kg on days 1-4, and lenalidomide 10 mg daily on days 1-21 for nine 28-day cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with lenalidomide 10 mg daily on days 1-21. RESULTS: Grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 52% of the patients, and granulocyte colonystimulating factor was administered in 43%. The mean neutrophil counts at the start of each MPR cycle, during nadir, and after 6 months of maintenance were 2.69 x 109/L, 1.43 x 109/L, and 2.11 x 109/L, respectively. Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia occurred in 24% of the patients. Platelet transfusions were required by 1 patient (5%) with a platelet count of 16 x 109/L; however, no thrombocytopenia-associated bleeding was reported. The mean platelet counts at the start of each cycle, during nadir, and after 6 months of maintenance were 174 x 109/L, 121 x 109/L, and 158 x 109/L, respectively. Median follow-up was 29.6 months, median progression-free survival was 28.5 months, and 2-year overall survival was 91%. CONCLUSION: MPR is a promising regimen with manageable hematologic toxicity.

Update on recent developments for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Recent studies have demonstrated that novel therapeutic combinations are challenging melphalan and prednisone (MP) as the standard of care in elderly patients with multiple myeloma. Combination regimens containing bortezomib or thalidomide can achieve response rates, especially complete response rates, which are superior to those seen with standard MP alone, and offer new possibilities for this patient population.

Lenalidomide and its role in the management of multiple myeloma.

Treatment of multiple myeloma has changed in recent years. Advances in the understanding of the pathogenesis of the disease and the mechanism of drug resistance have led to the development of novel effective biological treatment agents such as thalidomide and bortezomib. Lenalidomide is an oral analogue of thalidomide that lacks the neurotoxic side effects associated with the parent drug, and has shown significant antimyeloma activity. Lenalidomide has now been approved by the US FDA and the European Medicines Agency for use in combination with dexamethasone in patients with at least one prior therapy. Several trials are testing lenalidomide-based regimens in both newly diagnosed and relapsed patients. This review summarizes the profile of lenalidomide and its current role in the treatment of multiple myeloma.

New drugs in the therapy of multiple myeloma / Novas drogas na terapia do mieloma múltiplo

The advances in the understanding of the pathogenesis of multiple myeloma and the mechanism of drug resistance have led to the development of novel targeted therapies that are able to overcome resistance and show additive or synergistic effects with old chemotherapeutic agents. Thalidomide, its immunomodulatory derivative lenalidomide, and the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib, in combination with oral melphalan in the elderly and with intravenous melphalan in younger patients, are changing the traditional treatment paradigm of multiple myeloma. High-dose melphalan followed by autologous stem cell transplantation in the younger patients and oral melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide in the elderly are the standard of care for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. In younger patients, combinations incorporating thalidomide or lenalidomide or bortezomib significantly increase the pre-transplant response rate before high-dose melphalan and autologous transplantation, and may further improve the response rate and survival achieved after transplant. Prospective randomized studies incorporating new agents and stratifying patients based on cytogenetic abnormalities, are needed to define the therapeutic algorithm in high-risk disease.

O avanço do conhecimento da patogênese do mieloma múltiplo e do mecanismo de resistência a drogas propiciou o desenvolvimento de novas terapias alvo que vençam a resistência e apresentem efeitos sinérgicos e aditivos aos velhos agentes quimioterápicos. A talidomida, e o seu derivado imonumodulador, lenalidomida, e o inibidor da proteasoma bortezomib, em combinação com o melfalano no idoso e intravenoso no jovem, estão mudando os paradigmas tradicionais de tratamento do mieloma múltiplo. Altas doses de melfalano seguidas do transplante de células-tronco autólogo no paciente jovem e o tratamento oral de melfalano-predimisona- talidomida no idoso são agora tratamentos padrões para os portadores de mieloma múltiplo recém-diagnosticados. Nos pacientes jovens, as incorporações de combinações de talidomida ou lenamidomida ou bortezomib aumentam significativamente as taxas de respostas pré-transplante autólogo. Estas medidas melhoram as taxas de respostas e de sobrevida observadas após o transplante. Estudos prospectivos randomizados incorporam novos agentes para o tratamento de pacientes estratificados em anormalidades citogenéticas e são necessários para os pacientes com auto risco.

Oral melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide in elderly patients with multiple myeloma: updated results of a randomized controlled trial.

The initial analysis of the oral combination melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT) in newly diagnosed patients with myeloma showed significantly higher response rate and longer progression-free survival (PFS) than did the standard melphalan and prednisone (MP) combination and suggested a survival advantage. In this updated analysis, efficacy and safety end points were updated. Patients were randomly assigned to receive oral MPT or MP alone. Updated analysis was by intention to treat and included PFS, overall survival (OS), and survival after progression. After a median follow-up of 38.1 months, the median PFS was 21.8 months for MPT and 14.5 months for MP (P = .004). The median OS was 45.0 months for MPT and 47.6 months for MP (P = .79). In different patient subgroups, MPT improved PFS irrespective of age, serum concentrations of beta(2)-microglobulin, or high International Staging System. Thalidomide or bortezomib administration as salvage regimens significantly improved survival after progression in the MP group (P = .002) but not in the MPT group (P = .34). These data confirm activity of MPT for PFS but failed to show any survival advantage. New agents in the management of relapsed disease could explain this finding. The study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00232934.

Thromboembolic events with lenalidomide-based therapy for multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: The purpose was to evaluate the incidence and risk factors of thromboembolism associated with lenalidomide therapy in newly diagnosed myeloma. METHODS: A pooled analysis was performed of patients with previously untreated multiple myeloma enrolled in clinical trials of lenalidomide-based therapy at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, and the Italian Myeloma Network, Italy. The incidence of thrombosis, the effect of risk factors such as steroid dose and erythropoietin supplementation, and the effect of prophylaxis were examined. RESULTS: In all, 125 patients enrolled in 3 clinical trials were identified. Patients were stratified based on the concomitant corticosteroid dose. Fifty-two patients were in the high-dose group (dexamethasone 40 mg, 12 days a month); 73 patients were in the low-dose group (prednisone at any dose; or dexamethasone 40 mg, 4 days a month). A total of 110 patients were initiated on thromboprophylaxis; of these, 104 patients (95%) received aspirin. Ten patients (8%) developed deep vein thrombosis, including 4 who were not receiving any thromboprophylaxis at the time of the event. The rate of thromboembolic events was not different between patients who received concomitant erythropoietin therapy and those who did not, 4.8% and 8.6%, respectively (P= .54). A higher number of venous thrombotic episodes occurred in the high-dose corticosteroid group compared with the low-dose corticosteroid therapy group (12% vs 6%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P= .3). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of deep vein thrombosis is lower than previously reported in the literature. There was a trend to a higher incidence of thrombosis in patients receiving high-dose corticosteroid therapy.

Treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common oncohematologic disease. Most patients are older than 65 years at diagnosis, and different therapeutic options are available depending on the age of the patient. For those younger than 65 years, autologous stem cell transplantation is the standard of care, whereas in older patients the better choice is conventional chemotherapy. The introduction of thalidomide, bortezomib, and lenalidomide, which target MM cells and the bone marrow microenvironment, has changed the therapeutic options in newly diagnosed patients with MM.

Melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide treatment for newly diagnosed myeloma: a report from the GIMEMA--Italian Multiple Myeloma Network.

PURPOSE: Lenalidomide has shown significant antimyeloma activity in clinical studies. Oral melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide have been regarded as the standard of care in elderly multiple myeloma patients. We assessed dosing, efficacy, and safety of melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide (MPR) in newly diagnosed elderly myeloma patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Oral melphalan was administered in doses ranging from 0.18 to 0.25 mg/kg on days 1 to 4, prednisone at a 2-mg/kg dose on days 1 to 4, and lenalidomide at doses ranging from 5 to 10 mg on days 1 to 21, every 28 days for nine cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with lenalidomide alone. Aspirin was given as a prophylaxis for thrombosis. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients were enrolled and evaluated after completing the assigned treatment schedule. The maximum tolerated dose was defined as 0.18 mg/kg melphalan and 10 mg lenalidomide. With these doses, 81% of patients achieved at least a partial response, 47.6% achieved a very good partial response, and 23.8% achieved a complete immunofixation-negative response. In all patients, 1-year event-free and overall survival rates were 92% and 100%, respectively. At the maximum tolerated dose, grade 3 adverse events included neutropenia (38.1%), thrombocytopenia (14.2%), febrile neutropenia (9.5%), vasculitis (9.5%), and thromboembolism (4.8%); grade 4 adverse events were neutropenia (14.2%) and thrombocytopenia (9.5%). CONCLUSION: Oral MPR therapy is a promising first-line treatment for elderly myeloma patients. Hematologic adverse events were frequent but manageable. A low incidence of nonhematologic adverse events was noted. Aspirin appears to provide adequate antithrombosis prophylaxis.

Melphalan and its role in the management of patients with multiple myeloma.

Melphalan is an alkylating agent approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma and ovarian cancer. The combination of oral melphalan and prednisone was first introduced in the 1960s and remains the standard therapy for elderly multiple myeloma patients. High-dose melphalan followed by autologous stem cell support became the standard treatment for younger patients since the 1990s. The occurrence of drug resistance is the major limiting factor for the long-term success of this therapy, and relapse always occurs. In recent years, advances in the understanding of the pathogenesis of myeloma and the mechanism of drug resistance have led to the development of novel targeted therapies that are able to overcome resistance and show additive or synergistic effects with melphalan. Thalidomide, its immunomodulatory derivative lenalidomide and the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib, in combination with oral melphalan in the elderly and with intravenous melphalan in younger patients, are changing the traditional treatment paradigm of multiple myeloma.

Time to first disease progression, but not beta2-microglobulin, predicts outcome in myeloma patients who receive thalidomide as salvage therapy.

BACKGROUND: Baseline parameters that may be predictive of outcome after thalidomide treatment have been investigated to identify which myeloma patient subgroups will most benefit from this drug. METHODS: Thalidomide has been used as a salvage regimen at the study institution since 1999. A total of 102 myeloma patients who were diagnosed between January 1999 and February 2005 were evaluable for intention-to-treat analysis; 78 patients received thalidomide (at a dose of 100 mg/day continuously) and dexamethasone (at a dose of 40 mg/day on Days 1-4 each month) (TD) as salvage treatment whereas 24 patients died or were lost to follow-up before the initiation of TD. Several parameters such as serum beta2-microglobulin, serum C-reactive protein, immunoglobulin A isotype, hemoglobin, stage of disease, bone marrow plasmacytosis, age, serum creatinine, gender, stem cell transplantation at the time of diagnosis, and time to first disease progression were analyzed in association with overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The OS from the time of diagnosis was 43.8 months. Using univariate analysis, factors found to be associated with a shorter OS were a creatinine level > or =2 mg/dL (P = .05), stage III (P = .04), and time to first disease progression < or =12 months (P < .0001). The only factor that remained significantly associated with a shorter OS in multivariate models was time to first disease progression < or =12 months (P = .0006). Elevated serum beta2-microglobulin was not found to be predictive of poor OS. CONCLUSIONS: Time to first disease progression >12 months was found to be the best indicator of OS. Elevated serum beta2-microglobulin, generally considered to be a poor prognostic factor, was not found to be predictive of outcome.

Thalidomide-dexamethasone plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin vs. thalidomide-dexamethasone: a case-matched study in advanced multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES: Nearly all patients with multiple myeloma (MM) relapse or become refractory to front-line therapy. Several salvage therapies have been explored, but the optimal combination regimen has not been defined. We performed a case-matched study comparing patients with relapsed/refractory MM receiving thalidomide-dexamethasone alone or the combination thalidomide-dexamethasone-liposomal pegylated doxorubicin. METHODS: Forty-seven patients received thalidomide (100 mg/d), dexamethasone (40 mg p.o. on days 1-4 and 9-12), and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (40 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 28 d) (ThaDD). Their clinical outcome was compared with that of 47 pair mates selected from patients treated at relapse with thalidomide (100 mg/d) and dexamethasone (40 mg p.o. on days 1-4) (Thal-Dex) and matched for age, beta2-microglobulin and previous therapy. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Overall response rate was significantly higher in ThaDD group (92% vs. 63.5%; P < 0.0001) as partial response rate (> or =PR) (75.5% vs. 59.5%; P = 0.077), very good partial response rate (> or =VGPR) (36% vs. 15%; P = 0.018) and near complete remission rate (> or =nCR) (30% vs. 10.5%; P = 0.002). Non-hematologic toxicity was similar in the two groups of patients whereas hematologic toxicity and infections were significantly higher in ThaDD patients. Median progression-free survival, event-free survival, and overall survival were significantly longer in patients receiving ThaDD than in those treated with Thal-Dex. ThaDD regimen significantly improved response rate and overall survival in comparison with Thal-Dex. Although the frequency of hematologic toxicity and infections resulted higher in ThaDD group compared with control group, they were not particularly frequent after adequate prophylaxis was added and were easily managed when occurred.

Bortezomib, melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide for relapsed multiple myeloma.

In multiple myeloma (MM), the addition of thalidomide or bortezomib to the standard oral melphalan/prednisone combination significantly increased response rate and event-free survival. In this multicenter phase 1/2 trial, dosing, safety, and efficacy of the 4-drug combination, bortezomib, melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (VMPT) was determined. Bortezomib was administered at 3 dose levels (1.0 mg/m2, 1.3 mg/m2, or 1.6 mg/m2) on days 1, 4, 15, and 22; melphalan was given at a dose of 6 mg/m2 on days 1 through 5 and prednisone at 60 mg/m2 on days 1 through 5. Thalidomide was delivered at 50 mg on days 1 through 35. Each course was repeated every 35 days. The maximum tolerated dose of bortezomib was 1.3 mg/m2. Thirty patients with relapsed or refractory MM were enrolled; 20 patients (67%) achieved a partial response (PR) including 13 patients (43%) who achieved at least a very good PR. Among 14 patients who received VMPT as second-line treatment, the PR rate was 79% and the immunofixation-negative complete response rate 36%. The 1-year progression-free survival was 61%, and the 1-year survival from study entry was 84%. Grade 3 nonhematologic adverse events included infections (5 patients), fatigue (1), vasculitis (1), and peripheral neuropathy (2); no grade 4 toxicities were recorded. Initial results showed that VMPT is an effective salvage therapy with a very high proportion of responses. The incidence of neurotoxicities was unexpectedly low.

Intermediate-dose melphalan (100 mg/m2)/bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone and stem cell support in patients with refractory or relapsed myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Bortezomib and thalidomide have shown synergy with melphalan and dexamethasone. We used this 4-drug combination as conditioning before autologous hematopoietic cell infusions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-six patients with advanced-stage myeloma were treated with melphalan 50 mg/m(2) and bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) on days -6 and -3 in association with thalidomide 200 mg and dexamethasone 20 mg on days -6 through -3, followed by hematopoietic cell support on day 0. RESULTS: Nonhematologic toxicities included pneumonia, febrile neutropenia, and peripheral neuropathy. All patients had undergone autologous transplantation at diagnosis, and 13 patients (50%) underwent an additional transplantation at relapse. Responses occurred in 17 of 26 patients (65%), including 1 complete remission, 3 near complete remissions (12%), and 2 very good partial remissions (8%). Response rate was higher than that induced by the previous line of treatment in 12 patients (46%). CONCLUSION: Melphalan/bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone showed encouraging antimyeloma activity in patients with advanced-stage myeloma.

Intravenous melphalan, thalidomide and prednisone in refractory and relapsed multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES: Thalidomide combined with conventional chemotherapies including oral melphalan shows significant anti-myeloma activity. To address this issue, feasibility and efficacy of a three drug combination consisting of intravenous (i.v.) melphalan, thalidomide and prednisone [M(i.v.)PT] was evaluated in advanced myeloma patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-four advanced myeloma patients were treated with multiple cycles of a regimen consisting of low dose i.v. melphalan (20 mg/m2) at d 1, thalidomide at the dose of 50-100 mg/d given continuously and oral prednisone at the planned dose of 50 mg/d every other day. Intravenous melphalan was administered every fourth month. Median time from diagnosis was 40 months (range: 8-144 months). Fifteen patients (66%) had previously been treated with a combination of thalidomide and dexamethasone or with thalidomide alone. RESULTS: Overall, on an intent-to treat basis, 14 patients responded: three achieved near complete remission (nCR), seven achieved partial response (PR), four minimal response (MR). Six patients showed stable disease (SD) and four-disease progression. Interestingly, of five patients who had previously progressed while on thalidomide and prednisone, one reached nCR, two PR and one MR. After a median follow up of 14 months, median progression free survival was 9 months. Response duration was longer than that induced by the previous line of treatment in eight patients (33%). Thalidomide-associated toxicity mainly consisted of constipation, tingling and sedation. CONCLUSIONS: M(i.v.)PT is an effective regimen, which can overcome resistance to thalidomide plus prednisone in advanced myeloma with acceptable toxicity.