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

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

Carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients: the real-life experience of Rete Ematologica Pugliese (REP).

Carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) have been approved for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) based on ASPIRE clinical trial. However, its effectiveness and safety profile in real clinical practice should be further assessed. We retrospectively evaluated 130 consecutive RRMM patients treated with KRd between December 2015 and August 2018, in 9 Hematology Departments of Rete Ematologica Pugliese (REP). The overall response rate (ORR) was 79%, with 37% complete response (CR). Treatment with KRd led to an improvement in response regardless of age, refractory disease, and number and type of previous therapies. After a median follow-up of 18 months, median PFS was 24 months and 2y-PFS was 54%. PFS was longer in patients achieving a very good partial response (VGPR) with median PFS of 32.4 months. The relapses after prior autologous transplant (ASCT) positively impact median PFS. Several baseline disease characteristics, such as III ISS scoring or elevated LDH, and prior exposure to lenalidomide were found to negatively impact PFS. Primary refractory or relapsed myeloma patients have been treated with KRd as bridge to ASCT with a great benefit. Thirty-four (83%) reached at least a partial response after KRd and 21 (61%) performed ASCT. In transplanted patients, median PFS was not reached and 2y-PFS was 100%. The treatment discontinuation rate due to adverse events (AEs) was 18%, most commonly for lenalidomide (11%). Overall, in 10% of patients, a KRd dose reduction was necessary at least once (2.5% for carfilzomib and 8% for lenalidomide). The most frequent AE was neutropenia (44%) and anemia (41%). Infections occurred in 14% of patients. Cardiovascular events occurred in 11% of patients. Elderly patients have tolerated therapy very well, without additional side effects compared to younger patients, except for cardiac impairment. Our analysis confirmed that KRd is effective in RRMM patients. It is well tolerated and applicable to the majority of patients outside clinical trials. A longer PFS was shown in patients achieving VGPR, in those lenalidomide naïve and in patients relapsing after previous ASCT. Previous ASCT should not hamper the option for KRd therapy. Accordingly, KRd should be used as bridge regimen to ASCT with remarkable improvement in response and PFS rates. Further clinical studies are needed.

First-line therapy with either bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone or lenalidomide-dexamethasone followed by lenalidomide for transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma patients: a pooled analysis of two randomized trials.

Bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) and continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd) represent the standard treatment of transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). To date, no randomized trial has compared VMP to Rd, and there is no evidence of the optimal treatment for newly diagnosed MM, particularly in patients with high-risk cytogenetics [del(17p), t(4;14) or t(14;16)]. We pooled together data from patients with newly diagnosed MM treated with VMP or Rd induction followed by lenalidomide maintenance 10 mg (Rd-R) enrolled in the GIMEMA-MM-03-05 and EMN01 trials, to evaluate the efficacy of these treatments in different subgroups of patients, focusing on those with standard- and high-risk cytogenetics. Overall, 474 patients were analyzed (VMP: 257 patients; Rd-R: 217 patients). No differences in progression-free survival (hazard ratio=0.96) and overall survival (hazard ratio=1.08) were observed between standard-risk patients treated with VMP or Rd-R, whereas among the high-risk patients, the probabilities of progression (hazard ratio=0.54) and death (hazard ratio=0.73) were lower in the patients treated with VMP than in those treated with Rd-R. In particular, standard-risk patients >75 years benefited less from VMP than from Rd-R (hazard ratio for progression-free survival=0.96; hazard ratio for overall survival=1.81). In this non-randomized analysis, VMP and Rd-R were equally effective in younger (≤75 years), standard-risk patients, while older ones (>75 years) benefited more from Rd-R. In high-risk patients, VMP improved progression-free survival and overall survival irrespective of age. The source trials are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01063179 and NCT01093196).

Prognostic or predictive value of circulating cytokines and angiogenic factors for initial treatment of multiple myeloma in the GIMEMA MM0305 randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Several new drugs are approved for treatment of patients with multiple myeloma (MM), but no validated biomarkers are available for the prediction of a clinical outcome. We aimed to establish whether pretreatment blood and bone marrow plasma concentrations of major cytokines and angiogenic factors (CAFs) of patients from a phase 3 trial of a MM treatment could have a prognostic and predictive value in terms of response to therapy and progression-free and overall survival and whether these patients could be stratified for their prognosis. METHODS: Blood and bone marrow plasma levels of Ang-2, FGF-2, HGF, VEGF, PDGF-ß, IL-8, TNF-α, TIMP-1, and TIMP-2 were determined at diagnosis in MM patients enrolled in the GIMEMA MM0305 randomized controlled trial by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). These levels were correlated both reciprocally and with the type of therapy and patients' characteristics and with a group of non-MM patients as controls. RESULTS: No significant differences were detected between the blood and bone marrow plasma levels of angiogenic cytokines. A cutoff for each CAF was established. The therapeutic response of patients with blood plasma levels of CAFs lower than the cutoff was better than the response of those with higher levels in terms of percentage of responding patients and quality of response. CONCLUSION: FGF-2, HGF, VEGF, and PDGF-ß plasma levels at diagnosis have predictive significance for response to treatment. The stratification of patients based on the levels of CAFs at diagnosis and their variations after therapy is useful to characterize different risk groups concerning outcome and response to therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial information can be found at the following link: NCT01063179.

Minimal residual disease and log-reduction of plasma cells are associated with superior response after double autologous stem cell transplant in younger patients with multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Optimization of chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) has led to increase the frequency of cases with complete response (CR). Nonetheless, many MM patients still experience relapse, suggesting that CR represents a suboptimal response criteria, and that new therapeutic strategies are needed after single transplant. However, the role of double autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) as new adjunctive strategy remains to be elucidated. Indeed, we investigated the role of minimal residual disease (MRD) and log-reduction of plasma cells (PCs) as predictors of outcome and in quantifying the degree of tumor reduction after any ASCT. METHODS: MRD and log-reduction were assessed by a six-color flow cytometry (FC) at different time-points: post induction, post first-, and post-second ASCT. RESULTS: A significant difference was evidenced among the three time points for both log-reduction (P < 0.001) and MRD (P = 0.005). MRD levels after double ASCT were lower than MRD levels achieved after single ASCT (P = 0.005) and after induction (P < 0.001). Frequency of MRD positive patients after double ASCT was significantly lower rather than after the first ASCT (P = 0.008) and after induction (P = 0.004). Interestingly, a significant reduction of PFS was observed in patients with an unfavorable-risk cytogenetic (P < 0.001) and patients with MRD over 0.01% (P = 0.001) as well as log-reduction lower than 2.57 (P = 0.018) after double ASCT. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that a better clearance of myeloma cells is observed after the double ASCT, and a longer PFS is associated with a lower MRD. © 2018 International Clinical Cytometry Society.

Treatment Intensification With Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation and Lenalidomide Maintenance Improves Survival Outcomes of Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma in Complete Response.

BACKGROUND: High-dose therapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (HDT-ASCT) and maintenance treatment with novel agents are the best options for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, increasing the rate of complete response (CR) and prolonging progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Indeed, the achievement of a CR is a predictor of long-term survival among transplant-eligible patients. However, it is unclear whether patients reaching a CR after induction treatment could receive less intense consolidation or avoid maintenance therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed CR patients treated in 2 phase III trials, GIMEMA-RV-MM-PI-209 and RV-MM-EMN-441, to compare HDT-ASCT with an R-Alk (lenalidomide, alkylator) regimen as consolidation, and lenalidomide (R) maintenance with no maintenance. The primary endpoints were PFS, second PFS (PFS2), and OS from consolidation and maintenance (_m). RESULTS: Overall, the data from 166 patients in CR were analyzed, 95 in the HDT-ASCT group and 71 in the R-Alk group. The CR patients who received HDT-ASCT had a better PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.55; P = .01), PFS2 (HR, 0.46; P = .02), and OS (HR, 0.42; P = .03) compared with patients randomized to R-Alk. The survival benefit with HDT-ASCT was confirmed among all the subgroups, according to age, International Staging System (ISS stage, cytogenetic profile, and receipt of maintenance therapy. CR patients who received lenalidomide maintenance had a better PFS_m (4 years: 54% vs. 19%; HR, 0.43; P = .02) compared with those who received no maintenance. However, no difference was observed in terms of PFS2_m (4 years: 72% vs. 58%; HR, 0.83; P = .67) and OS_m (4 years: 79% vs. 72%; HR, 0.82; P = .73) with maintenance therapy. CONCLUSION: Even in CR patients, outcomes were improved by an intensified approach with HDT-ASCT consolidation and lenalidomide-based maintenance therapy.

Ruxolitinib - better prognostic impact in low-intermediate 1 risk score: evaluation of the 'rete ematologica pugliese' (REP) in primary and secondary myelofibrosis.

We evaluated ruxolitinib in 65 patients with myelofibrosis according to age, sex, time of diagnosis, grade of fibrosis, prognostic score risk, Janus kinase (JAK) status, primary or secondary myelofibrosis, previous treatment, and dosage. Outcome measures were response rate, time to response, duration of response, and event-free survival and survival. Kaplan and Meier curves show a significant difference in event-free survival according to the prognostic score, in favor of patients with low int1 (p = 0.0009). The Cox stepwise model confirmed the result, the int2 high-risk score being the most powerful negative independent parameter (0.001), followed by JAK (0.008); other parameters, such as diagnosis more than 5 years earlier, grade III-IV fibrosis, and ruxolitinib dose have a negligible impact. Time to response was shorter (p = 0.001) in primary myelofibrosis. In conclusion, ruxolitinib is effective, with a better outcome in patients with a low-int1 risk score. This may suggest considering an earlier administration in the disease course.

Triplet vs doublet lenalidomide-containing regimens for the treatment of elderly patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Lenalidomide-dexamethasone improved outcome in newly diagnosed elderly multiple myeloma patients. We randomly assigned 662 patients who were age ≥65 years or transplantation-ineligible to receive induction with melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) or cyclophosphamide-prednisone-lenalidomide (CPR) or lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in triplet (MPR and CPR) vs doublet (Rd) lenalidomide-containing regimens. After a median follow-up of 39 months, the median PFS was 22 months for the triplet combinations and 21 months for the doublet (P = .284). The median overall survival (OS) was not reached in either arms, and the 4-year OS was 67% for the triplet and 58% for the doublet arms (P = .709). By considering the 3 treatment arms separately, no difference in outcome was detected among MPR, CPR, and Rd. The most common grade ≥3 toxicity was neutropenia: 64% in MPR, 29% in CPR, and 25% in Rd patients (P < .0001). Grade ≥3 nonhematologic toxicities were similar among arms and were mainly infections (6.5% to 11%), constitutional (3.5% to 9.5%), and cardiac (4.5% to 6%), with no difference among the arms. In conclusion, in the overall population, the alkylator-containing triplets MPR and CPR were not superior to the alkylator-free doublet Rd, which was associated with lower toxicity. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01093196.

Bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide followed by maintenance with bortezomib-thalidomide compared with bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma: updated follow-up and improved survival.

PURPOSE: Bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) has improved overall survival in multiple myeloma. This randomized trial compared VMP plus thalidomide (VMPT) induction followed by bortezomib-thalidomide maintenance (VMPT-VT) with VMP in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomly assigned 511 patients who were not eligible for transplantation to receive VMPT-VT (nine 5-week cycles of VMPT followed by 2 years of VT maintenance) or VMP (nine 5-week cycles without maintenance). RESULTS: In the initial analysis with a median follow-up of 23 months, VMPT-VT improved complete response rate from 24% to 38% and 3-year progression-free-survival (PFS) from 41% to 56% compared with VMP. In this analysis, median follow-up was 54 months. The median PFS was significantly longer with VMPT-VT (35.3 months) than with VMP (24.8 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; P < .001). The time to next therapy was 46.6 months in the VMPT-VT group and 27.8 months in the VMP group (HR, 0.52; P < .001). The 5-year overall survival (OS) was greater with VMPT-VT (61%) than with VMP (51%; HR, 0.70; P = .01). Survival from relapse was identical in both groups (HR, 0.92; P = .63). In the VMPT-VT group, the most frequent grade 3 to 4 adverse events included neutropenia (38%), thrombocytopenia (22%), peripheral neuropathy (11%), and cardiologic events (11%). All of these, except for thrombocytopenia, were significantly more frequent in the VMPT-VT patients. CONCLUSION: Bortezomib and thalidomide significantly improved OS in multiple myeloma patients not eligible for transplantation.

Age and organ damage correlate with poor survival in myeloma patients: meta-analysis of 1435 individual patient data from 4 randomized trials.

Thalidomide and bortezomib are extensively used to treat elderly myeloma patients. In these patients, treatment-related side effects are frequent and full drug doses difficult to tolerate. We retrospectively analyzed data from 1435 elderly patients enrolled in 4 European phase III trials including thalidomide and/or bortezomib. After a median follow up of 33 months (95%CI: 10-56 months), 513 of 1435 patients (36%) died; median overall survival was 50 months (95%CI: 46-60 months). The risk of death was increased in patients aged 75 years or over (HR 1.44, 95%CI: 1.20-1.72; P<0.001), in patients with renal failure (HR 2.02, 95%CI: 1.51-2.70; P<0.001), in those who experienced grade 3-4 infections, cardiac or gastrointestinal adverse events during treatment (HR 2.53, 95%CI: 1.75-3.64; P<0.001) and in those who required drug discontinuation due to adverse events (HR 1.67, 95%CI; 1.12-2.51; P=0.01). This increased risk was restricted to the first six months after occurrence of adverse events or drug discontinuation and declined over time. More intensive approaches, such as the combination of bortezomib-thalidomide, negatively affected outcome. Bortezomib-based combinations may overcome the negative impact of renal failure. Age 75 years or over or renal failure at presentation, occurrence of infections, cardiac or gastrointestinal adverse events negatively affected survival. A detailed geriatric assessment, organ evaluation and less intense individualized approaches are suggested in elderly unfit subjects.

Lenalidomide can induce long-term responses in patients with multiple myeloma relapsing after multiple chemotherapy lines, in particular after allogeneic transplant.

Evidence of long-term response to lenalidomide in heavily pretreated patients with multiple myeloma is lacking. This study sought to assess whether long-term responders exist, long-term responders' characteristics, and predictive factors of a long-term response. One hundred and four patients with multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide and dexamethasone after ≥2 therapy lines (median, 3) were analyzed. Long-term response was defined as at least a partial response (≥PR) lasting ≥12 months. The overall response rate was 73%, and 80.3% of the responses were achieved within 5 months. The median response was 14.3 months. Patients evaluable for long-term response numbered 87, and a total of 47% were long-term responders. Compared to non-long-term responders, long-term responders had better overall survival, less light-chain multiple myeloma, and higher incidence of t(11;14). Previous allogeneic transplant (alloSCT) and the response quality predicted a long-term response. In conclusion, patients treated with lenalidomide can become long-term responders; alloSCT and response quality predict long-term response.

Bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide followed by maintenance with bortezomib-thalidomide compared with bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: The combination of bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) is a new standard of care for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. This phase III study examined the efficacy of the four-drug combination of bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (VMPT) followed by maintenance with bortezomib-thalidomide (VMPT-VT) compared with VMP treatment alone in untreated multiple myeloma patients who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 511 patients were randomly assigned to receive nine cycles of VMPT followed by continuous VT as maintenance, or nine cycles of VMP at the same doses with no additional therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: The 3-year estimates of progression-free survival were 56% in patients receiving VMPT-VT and 41% in those receiving VMP (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.90; P = .008). At 3 years, the cumulative proportions of patients who did not go on to the next therapy were 72% with VMPT-VT and 60% with VMP (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.90; P = .007). Complete response rates were 38% in the VMPT-VT group and 24% in the VMP group (P < .001). The 3-year overall survival was 89% with VMPT-VT and 87% with VMP (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.53 to 1.60; P = .77). Grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (38% v 28%; P = .02), cardiologic events (10% v 5%; P = .04), and thromboembolic events (5% v 2%; P = .08) were more frequent among patients assigned to the VMPT-VT group than among those assigned to the VMP group; treatment-related deaths were 4% with VMPT-VT and 3% with VMP. CONCLUSION: VMPT followed by VT as maintenance was superior to VMP alone in patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation.

Melphalan 200 mg/m(2) versus melphalan 100 mg/m(2) in newly diagnosed myeloma patients: a prospective, multicenter phase 3 study.

High-dose (200 mg/m(2), MEL200) and intermediate-dose melphalan (100 mg/m(2), MEL100) showed significant activity in myeloma. In a phase 3 study, 298 patients were randomly assigned to receive 2 autologous transplantations after conditioning with MEL200 or MEL100. Ninety-six of 149 (64%) completed MEL200 and 103 of 149 (69%) MEL100. Best response to MEL200 was: complete remission 22 of 149 (15%); partial remission 95 of 149 (64%), for an overall response rate of 79%. Best response to MEL100 was: complete remission 12 of 149 (8%); partial remission 95 of 149 (64%), for an overall response rate of 72%. Overall survival did not differ (P = .13); median progression-free survival (31.4 vs 26.2 months, P = .01), median time to progression (34.4 vs 27.0 months, P = .014) were longer in the MEL200. Treatment-related mortality was 3.1% in the MEL200 and 2.9% in the MEL100 group. Severe neutropenia and infections were marginally superior, whereas severe thrombocytopenia, mucositis, gastrointestinal adverse events, and the overall occurrence of at least 1 nonhematologic grade 3 or 4 adverse event were significantly higher in the MEL200 cohort. We conclude that MEL200 leads to longer remission duration and should be considered the standard conditioning regimen for autologous transplantation. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00950768.