Formulation characterization of lecithin organogel as topical drug delivery system for psoriasis: In-vitro permeation and preclinical evaluation.

Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory and proliferative skin disease that causes pathological skin changes and has a substantial impact on the quality of patient life. Apremilast was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration as an oral medication for psoriasis and is beneficial in mild to moderate conditions for chronic usage. However, 5%-7% of withdrawals were reported due to severe side effects. To address the issue, a localized drug delivery strategy via the topical route may be a viable approach. However, poor physicochemical properties make it vulnerable to passing through the skin, requiring a specialized drug delivery system to demonstrate its full potential via a topical route like lecithin organogel. The formulation was optimized by screening the suitable lecithin type and non-polar solvents based on the gel formation ability of lecithin and the solubility of apremilast in the solvent. The pseudo-ternary diagram was used to optimize the water content required to form the gel. The optimized gel was found to be shear thinning characterized for rheological parameters, in-vitro diffusion studies, and in-vitro skin distribution studies. Preclinical studies in Imiquimod-induced mice showed a better reduction in severity index, cytokine levels, and epidermal hyperplasia from the lecithin organogel group compared to the apremilast oral administration and marketed standard topical gel group. Based on these results, lecithin organogel can be considered a promising approach to deliver molecules like apremilast by topical route in psoriatic-like conditions.

Efficacy and safety of daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone versus daratumumab, carfilzomib, and dexamethasone in daratumumab-naïve relapsed multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study to analyze the safety and efficacy of DPd versus DKd in daratumumab naïve RRMM patients treated in real-world practice. RESULTS: A total of 187 patients with RRMM were included in the analysis; 128 patients received DPd, and 59 patients received DKd. A vast majority (80%) of patients had lenalidomide refractory disease and nearly 50% had bortezomib refractory disease. The overall response and complete response rates were 76% and 34% in the DPd group versus 80% and 51% in the DKd group, respectively. With a median follow up of 36 months for the entire patient population, median PFS and OS in the DPd versus DKd groups were 12, 12, 37, and 35 months, respectively. The most common grade 3+ adverse events in the DPd versus DKd groups were neutropenia (32% vs. 7%), anemia (14% vs. 10%), thrombocytopenia (13% vs. 15%), and cardiovascular events (4% vs. 15%), respectively. Both DPd and DKd appeared to be a safe and effective treatment options for RRMM. CONCLUSIONS: While there were more cytopenias associated with DPd and more cardiovascular side effects with DKd, there were no significant differences in the survival outcomes with these two regimens.

Pomalidomide combined with dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pomalidomide in combination treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). METHODS: Published clinical trials were searched in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE to February 2023. The literature was screened and evaluated according to the inclusion criteria, and the data were analyzed by a random effect model. Overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and full grade or ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) were the outcomes. RESULTS: This study included 31 clinical trials, which included 4776 patients. The pooled ORR of the doublet regimens was 33.3% (95%CI: 27-39%) and the triplet regimens was 66% (95%CI: 58-74%). Among the 25 included studies, the median PFS was 8.29 months (95%CI: 7.27-9.31), and nine studies reported median OS of 19.43 months (95%CI: 14.56-24.30). In terms of safety, the most common hematologic AEs of grade ≥ 3 were neutropenia (41%) and anemia (20%); Non-hematologic AEs were pneumonia (14%) and infection/febrile neutropenia (14%). CONCLUSIONS: Pomalidomide combined treatment regimens have shown good clinical efficacy, especially in pomalidomide + dexamethasone combined with other drugs. In terms of safety, it's important to pay attention to the likelihood of hematological adverse events when used clinically. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42023420644.

Thalidomide for Recurrent Bleeding Due to Small-Intestinal Angiodysplasia.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent bleeding from the small intestine accounts for 5 to 10% of cases of gastrointestinal bleeding and remains a therapeutic challenge. Thalidomide has been evaluated for the treatment of recurrent bleeding due to small-intestinal angiodysplasia (SIA), but confirmatory trials are lacking. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of thalidomide for the treatment of recurrent bleeding due to SIA. Eligible patients with recurrent bleeding (at least four episodes of bleeding during the previous year) due to SIA were randomly assigned to receive thalidomide at an oral daily dose of 100 mg or 50 mg or placebo for 4 months. Patients were followed for at least 1 year after the end of the 4-month treatment period. The primary end point was effective response, which was defined as a reduction of at least 50% in the number of bleeding episodes that occurred during the year after the end of thalidomide treatment as compared with the number that occurred during the year before treatment. Key secondary end points were cessation of bleeding without rebleeding, blood transfusion, hospitalization because of bleeding, duration of bleeding, and hemoglobin levels. RESULTS: Overall, 150 patients underwent randomization: 51 to the 100-mg thalidomide group, 49 to the 50-mg thalidomide group, and 50 to the placebo group. The percentages of patients with an effective response in the 100-mg thalidomide group, 50-mg thalidomide group, and placebo group were 68.6%, 51.0%, and 16.0%, respectively (P<0.001 for simultaneous comparison across the three groups). The results of the analyses of the secondary end points supported those of the primary end point. Adverse events were more common in the thalidomide groups than in the placebo group overall; specific events included constipation, somnolence, limb numbness, peripheral edema, dizziness, and elevated liver-enzyme levels. CONCLUSIONS: In this placebo-controlled trial, treatment with thalidomide resulted in a reduction in bleeding in patients with recurrent bleeding due to SIA. (Funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China and the Shanghai Municipal Education Commission, Gaofeng Clinical Medicine; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02707484.).

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.

Effect of Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation Combined with Modified VTD Regimen on Elderly Patients with Multiple Myeloma and Its Influence on miRNA Cytokines.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect of autologous stem cell transplantation combined with modified VTD regimen on elderly patients with multiple myeloma and its influence on miRNA cytokines. METHODS: The data of 42 elderly patients with multiple myeloma who were treated in our hospital from May 2010 to June 2018 were retrospectively analyzed, and they were divided into the combined group (autologous stem cell transplantation combined with improved VTD scheme, n = 25) and the control group (improved VTD scheme, n = 17) according to different treatment schemes, and the clinical efficacy of the two groups was compared. The levels of CD3+, CD4+, CD4+/CD8+, and Treg were measured in the two groups. The expression levels of miRNA-15a, miRNA-16, and miRNA-21 in the bone marrow fluid of the two groups were measured before and after treatment. The levels of M protein and myeloma cells in the two groups were detected. Comparing the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups, the Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis. RESULTS: The total effective rate of the combined group (84.00%) was higher than that of the control group (52.94%), and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). After treatment, the levels of CD3+, CD4+, CD4+/CD8+, Treg, miRNA-15a, and miRNA-16 in the combined group were higher than those in the control group, and the levels of miRNA-21, M protein, and myeloma cells were lower than those in the control group, with statistical significance (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in adverse reactions between the two groups (P > 0.05). The first, second, and third year survival rates of group A (96.00%, 88.00%, and 80.00%) were significantly higher than those of the control group (70.59%, 58.82%, and 47.06%), and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Autologous stem cell transplantation combined with a modified VTD regimen can effectively improve the immune function and survival rate of elderly patients with multiple myeloma, which is safe and effective.

Cyclophosphamide addition to pomalidomide/dexamethasone is not necessarily associated with universal benefits in RRMM.

In the backdrop of rapidly changing relapsed/refractory (RR) multiple myeloma (MM) treatment schema that mainly evolves around immunotherapies, it is easy to disregard more traditional drugs. Finding the best partner for pomalidomide, a potent third-generation immunomodulatory drug, is an important agenda we face as a community and cyclophosphamide addition has been used for outcomes augmentation. We carried out this real-world study to identify patients who will show durable response to pomalidomide and those who will benefit from cyclophosphamide addition. A total of 103 patients (57 in pomalidomide-dexamethasone [Pd] group versus 46 in pomalidomide-cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone [PCd]) were studied. They were previously treated with bortezomib (98.1%) or lenalidomide (100%) and previous lines of therapy were median 3 lines. Significantly better overall response rate (ORR) was seen in the PCd (75.6%) than Pd (41.7%) group (p = 0.001), but no differences in survival outcomes. Subgroup analysis revealed that high-risk myeloma features, poor response to lenalidomide or bortezomib had superior ORRs when cyclophosphamide was added. Also, long-term responders for pomalidomide were associated with excellent response to previous IMiD treatments. Pomalidomide-based therapy was discontinued in five patients due to intolerance or adverse events, but there was no mortality during treatment. In conclusion, we showed that pomalidomide-based treatment is still relevant and can ensure durable response in RRMM setting, especially for patients who responded well to previous lenalidomide. Addition of cyclophosphamide to Pd is associated with better ORR, and can be positively considered in fit patients with high-risk MM, extramedullary disease, and less-than-satisfactory response to previous lenalidomide treatment.

Oral ixazomib-dexamethasone vs oral pomalidomide-dexamethasone for lenalidomide-refractory, proteasome inhibitor-exposed multiple myeloma: a randomized Phase 2 trial.

Multiple myeloma (MM) patients typically receive several lines of combination therapy and first-line treatment commonly includes lenalidomide. As patients age, they become less tolerant to treatment, requiring convenient/tolerable/lenalidomide-free options. Carfilzomib and/or bortezomib-exposed/intolerant, lenalidomide-refractory MM patients with ≥2 prior lines of therapy were randomized 3:2 to ixazomib-dexamethasone (ixa-dex) (n = 73) or pomalidomide-dexamethasone (pom-dex) (n = 49) until progression/toxicity. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 7.1 vs 4.8 months with ixa-dex vs pom-dex (HR 0.847, 95% CI 0.535-1.341, P = 0.477; median follow-up: 15.3 vs 17.3 months); there was no statistically significant difference between arms. In patients with 2 and ≥3 prior lines of therapy, respectively, mPFS was 11.0 vs 5.7 months (HR 1.083, 95% CI 0.547-2.144) and 5.7 vs 3.7 months (HR 0.686, 95% CI 0.368-1.279). Among ixa-dex vs pom-dex patients, 69% vs 81% had Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), 51% vs 53% had serious TEAEs, 39% vs 36% had TEAEs leading to drug discontinuation, 44% vs 32% had TEAEs leading to dose reduction, and 13% vs 13% died on study. Quality of life was similar between arms and maintained during treatment. Ixa-dex represents an important lenalidomide-free, oral option for this heavily pretreated, lenalidomide-refractory, proteasome inhibitor-exposed population.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03170882.

Informe técnico N. 001/22 - Hanseníase: orientações para a prescrição e dispensação do medicamento talidomida / Technical report N. 001/22 - Leprosy: guidelines for prescribing and dispensing thalidomide drug

A Talidomida é um medicamento de uso controlado, cuja utilização exige uma série de medidas relacionadas à produção, prescrição e dispensação pelos seus efeitos teratogênicos comprovados ­ Resolução n° 11 de 22 de março de 2011

Thalidomide is a drug for controlled use, whose use requires a series of measures related to production, prescription and dispensing for their teratogenic effects proven - Resolution No. 11 of March 22, 2011

Pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone at first relapse in lenalidomide-pretreated myeloma: A subanalysis of OPTIMISMM by clinical characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (PVd) vs bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) by age, renal function, and high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities in lenalidomide-pretreated patients with multiple myeloma at first relapse. METHODS: OPTIMISMM was a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, randomized study (NCT01734928; N = 559). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Overall, 226 patients had received one prior line of therapy. PVd significantly prolonged PFS vs Vd in patients aged ≤65 years (median, 22.0 vs 13.1 months; P = .0258) and >65 years (median, 17.6 vs 9.9 months; P = .0369). Median PFS in patients with renal impairment (RI; creatinine clearance <60 mL/min) was 15.1 months with PVd vs 9.5 months with Vd (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67 [95% CI, 0.34-1.34]). In patients without RI, median PFS was 22.0 vs 13.1 months (HR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.27-0.76]). In patients with high-risk cytogenetics, median PFS was 14.7 vs 9.9 months (HR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.13-1.17]). PVd significantly improved overall response rate vs Vd in all subgroups. The safety profile of PVd was consistent with previous reports. CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirmed the benefits of PVd at first relapse, including in patients with poor prognostic factors.

A randomized phase 3 study of ixazomib-dexamethasone versus physician's choice in relapsed or refractory AL amyloidosis.

In the first phase 3 study in relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis (TOURMALINE-AL1 NCT01659658), 168 patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis after 1-2 prior lines were randomized to ixazomib (4 mg, days 1, 8, 15) plus dexamethasone (20 mg, days 1, 8, 15, 22; n = 85) or physician's choice (dexamethasone ± melphalan, cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, or lenalidomide; n = 83) in 28-day cycles until progression or toxicity. Primary endpoints were hematologic response rate and 2-year vital organ deterioration or mortality rate. Only the first primary endpoint was formally tested at this interim analysis. Best hematologic response rate was 53% with ixazomib-dexamethasone vs 51% with physician's choice (p = 0.76). Complete response rate was 26 vs 18% (p = 0.22). Median time to vital organ deterioration or mortality was 34.8 vs 26.1 months (hazard ratio 0.53; 95% CI, 0.32-0.87; p = 0.01). Median treatment duration was 11.7 vs 5.0 months. Adverse events of clinical importance included diarrhea (34 vs 30%), rash (33 vs 20%), cardiac arrhythmias (26 vs 15%), nausea (24 vs 14%). Despite not meeting the first primary endpoint, all time-to-event data favored ixazomib-dexamethasone. These results are clinically relevant to this relapsed/refractory patient population with no approved treatment options.

Comparative analysis of the use and control of thalidomide in Brazil and different countries: is it possible to say there is safety?

INTRODUCTION: One of the biggest drug disasters in history has not prevented thalidomide from being used to treat various clinical conditions. Currently, Brazil has a worrying scenario: high consumption of the drug and, cases of pregnant women using thalidomide, even after adopting restrictive legislation. AREAS COVERED: This review of the literature and legislation sought to comparatively analyze the monitoring of thalidomide use in Brazil and other countries that use this drug. Finally, we discuss the differences between the countries. EXPERT OPINION: This analysis allows us to think beyond the safe use of thalidomide, but the safety provided by any type of monitoring system. It seems that out-patients that use unsafe drugs are exposed to some degree of risk. To improve safety, more extensive improvements are needed than monitoring systems related to the use of thalidomide. Its safe use depends on a drastic reduction in the incidence of leprosy and Erythema Nodosum Leprosum in the world; investment in research and development of safe and effective therapeutic alternatives to thalidomide; improvement of health systems and their health surveillance systems, particularly in primary health care; awareness of health professionals and patients for greater responsibility in the use of medicines, especially thalidomide.

Population pharmacokinetic and exposure-response analyses of elotuzumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.

PURPOSE: Elotuzumab plus pomalidomide/dexamethasone (E-Pd) demonstrated efficacy and safety in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The clinical pharmacology of elotuzumab [± lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Ld)] was characterized previously. These analyses describe elotuzumab population pharmacokinetics (PPK), the effect of Pd, and assess elotuzumab exposure-response relationships for efficacy and safety in patients with RRMM. METHODS: A previously established PPK model was updated with E-Pd data from the phase 2 ELOQUENT-3 study (NCT02654132). The dataset included 8180 serum concentrations from 440 patients with RRMM from 5 clinical trials. Elotuzumab PK parameter estimates were used to generate individual daily time-varying average concentrations (daily Cavg) for multi-variable time-to-event exposure-response analyses of progression-free survival (PFS) and time to the first occurrence of grade 3 + adverse events (AEs) in RRMM. RESULTS: Elotuzumab PK were well-described by a two-compartment model with parallel linear and Michaelis-Menten elimination from the central compartment (Vmax) and non-renewable target-mediated elimination from the peripheral compartment (Kint). Co-administration with Pd resulted in a 19% and 51% decrease in elotuzumab linear clearance and Kint, respectively, versus Ld; steady-state exposures were similar. Vmax increased with increasing serum M-protein. Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for daily Cavg were 0.9983 (0.9969-0.9997) and 0.9981 (0.9964-0.9998) for PFS and grade 3 + AEs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The PPK model adequately described the data and was appropriate for determining exposures for exposure-response analyses. There were no clinically relevant differences in elotuzumab exposures between Pd and Ld backbones. In ELOQUENT-3, increasing elotuzumab daily Cavg prolonged PFS without increasing grade 3 + AEs.

Safety and efficacy of thalidomide in patients with transfusion-dependent ß-thalassemia: a randomized clinical trial.

Thalidomide induces γ-globin expression in erythroid progenitor cells, but its efficacy on patients with transfusion-dependent ß-thalassemia (TDT) remains unclear. In this phase 2, multi-center, randomized, double-blind clinical trial, we aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of thalidomide in TDT patients. A hundred patients of 14 years or older were randomly assigned to receive placebo or thalidomide for 12 weeks, followed by an extension phase of at least 36 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change of hemoglobin (Hb) level in the patients. The secondary endpoints included the red blood cell (RBC) units transfused and adverse effects. In the placebo-controlled period, Hb concentrations in patients treated with thalidomide achieved a median elevation of 14.0 (range, 2.5 to 37.5) g/L, whereas Hb in patients treated with placebo did not significantly change. Within the 12 weeks, the mean RBC transfusion volume for patients treated with thalidomide and placebo was 5.4 ± 5.0 U and 10.3 ± 6.4 U, respectively (P < 0.001). Adverse events of drowsiness, dizziness, fatigue, pyrexia, sore throat, and rash were more common with thalidomide than placebo. In the extension phase, treatment with thalidomide for 24 weeks resulted in a sustainable increase in Hb concentrations which reached 104.9 ± 19.0 g/L, without blood transfusion. Significant increase in Hb concentration and reduction in RBC transfusions were associated with non ß0/ß0 and HBS1L-MYB (rs9399137 C/T, C/C; rs4895441 A/G, G/G) genotypes. These results demonstrated that thalidomide is effective in patients with TDT.

Carfilzomib with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone or lenalidomide and dexamethasone plus autologous transplantation or carfilzomib plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone, followed by maintenance with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide or lenalidomide alone for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (FORTE): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Bortezomib-based induction followed by high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m2) and autologous stem-cell transplantation (MEL200-ASCT) and maintenance treatment with lenalidomide alone is the current standard of care for young and fit patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different carfilzomib-based induction and consolidation approaches with or without transplantation and of maintenance treatment with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus lenalidomide alone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. METHODS: UNITO-MM-01/FORTE was a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial done in 42 Italian academic and community practice centres. We enrolled transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma aged 65 years or younger with a Karnofsky Performance Status of 60% or higher. Patients were stratified according to International Staging System stage (I vs II/III) and age (<60 years vs 60-65 years) and randomly assigned (1:1:1) to KRd plus ASCT (four 28-day induction cycles with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide plus dexamethasone [KRd], melphalan at 200 mg/m2 and autologous stem-cell transplantation [MEL200-ASCT], followed by four 28-day KRd consolidation cycles), KRd12 (12 28-day KRd cycles), or KCd plus ASCT (four 28-day induction cycles with carfilzomib plus cyclophosphamide plus dexamethasone [KCd], MEL200-ASCT, and four 28-day KCd consolidation cycles). Carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 was administered intravenously on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16; lenalidomide 25 mg administered orally on days 1-21; cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 administered orally on days 1, 8, and 15; and dexamethasone 20 mg administered orally or intravenously on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, and 23. Thereafter, patients were stratified according to induction-consolidation treatment and randomly assigned (1:1) to maintenance treatment with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide or lenalidomide alone. Carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 was administered intravenously on days 1-2 and 15-16 every 28 days for up to 2 years; lenalidomide 10 mg was administered orally on days 1-21 every 28 days until progression or intolerance in both groups. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with at least a very good partial response after induction with KRd versus KCd and progression-free survival with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus lenalidomide alone as maintenance treatment, both assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02203643. Study recruitment is complete, and all patients are in the follow-up or maintenance phases. FINDINGS: Between Feb 23, 2015, and April 5, 2017, 474 patients were randomly assigned to one of the induction-intensification-consolidation groups (158 to KRd plus ASCT, 157 to KRd12, and 159 to KCd plus ASCT). The median duration of follow-up was 50·9 months (IQR 45·7-55·3) from the first randomisation. 222 (70%) of 315 patients in the KRd group and 84 (53%) of 159 patients in the KCd group had at least a very good partial response after induction (OR 2·14, 95% CI 1·44-3·19, p=0·0002). 356 patients were randomly assigned to maintenance treatment with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide (n=178) or lenalidomide alone (n=178). The median duration of follow-up was 37·3 months (IQR 32·9-41·9) from the second randomisation. 3-year progression-free survival was 75% (95% CI 68-82) with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus 65% (58-72) with lenalidomide alone (hazard ratio [HR] 0·64 [95% CI 0·44-0·94], p=0·023). During induction and consolidation, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (21 [13%] of 158 patients in the KRd plus ASCT group vs 15 [10%] of 156 in the KRd12 group vs 18 [11%] of 159 in the KCd plus ASCT group); dermatological toxicity (nine [6%] vs 12 [8%] vs one [1%]); and hepatic toxicity (13 [8%] vs 12 [8%] vs none). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 18 (11%) of 158 patients in the KRd-ASCT group, 29 (19%) of 156 in the KRd12 group, and 17 (11%) of 159 in the KCd plus ASCT group; the most common serious adverse event was pneumonia, in seven (4%) of 158, four (3%) of 156, and five (3%) of 159 patients. Treatment-emergent deaths were reported in two (1%) of 158 patients in the KRd plus ASCT group, two (1%) of 156 in the KRd12 group, and three (2%) of 159 in the KCd plus ASCT group. During maintenance, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (35 [20%] of 173 patients on carfilzomib plus lenalidomide vs 41 [23%] of 177 patients on lenalidomide alone); infections (eight [5%] vs 13 [7%]); and vascular events (12 [7%] vs one [1%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 24 (14%) of 173 patients on carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus 15 (8%) of 177 on lenalidomide alone; the most common serious adverse event was pneumonia, in six (3%) of 173 versus five (3%) of 177 patients. One patient died of a treatment-emergent adverse event in the carfilzomib plus lenalidomide group. INTERPRETATION: Our data show that KRd plus ASCT showed superiority in terms of improved responses compared with the other two treatment approaches and support the prospective randomised evaluation of KRd plus ASCT versus standards of care (eg, daratumumab plus bortezomib plus thalidomide plus dexamethasone plus ASCT) in transplant-eligible patients with multiple myeloma. Carfilzomib plus lenalidomide as maintenance therapy also improved progression-free survival compared with the standard-of-care lenalidomide alone. FUNDING: Amgen, Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb. TRANSLATION: For the Italian translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Case Report: Rapid Response to Low-Dose Thalidomide in a Case of Severe Steroid Recalcitrant Erythema Nodosum Leprosum.

Erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL), or type 2 lepra reaction, presents with crops of evanescent, tender erythematous nodules accompanied by fever, arthralgia, malaise and organ-specific manifestations and is seen in borderline and lepromatous leprosy. The drugs approved for ENL include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, systemic steroids, thalidomide and clofazimine. The management of ENL is challenging because long-term steroid use leads to steroid dependence. The present patient had severe steroid recalcitrant ENL with vesicular and pustular lesions mimicking Sweet's syndrome and was treated effectively with a low-dose thalidomide regimen (100 mg/d) as opposed to high dose (400 mg/d) recommended in literature. We discuss the patho-mechanics and clinical utility of a low-dose thalidomide regimen as an effective treatment option for ENL.

A phase I/II study of ixazomib, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone for lenalidomide and proteasome inhibitor refractory multiple myeloma (Alliance A061202).

Preclinical studies have demonstrated activity of the oral proteasome inhibitor (PI) ixazomib (IXA) in bortezomib-resistant multiple myeloma (MM) and synergy with immunomodulatory drugs. We therefore conducted a phase I/II study to establish the safety and preliminary efficacy of IXA with pomalidomide (POM) and dexamethasone (DEX) in lenalidomide (LEN)/PI-refractory MM. Dose escalation established a 4 mg dose of POM and IXA and 20/40 mg dose of DEX as the maximum tolerated dose. The phase II portion of the trial was redesigned and started anew after six patients had been randomized to IXA-POM-DEX due to a rapidly changing treatment landscape. Among the 29 evaluable LEN/PI-refractory patients treated with IXA-POM-DEX in phase I/II, the overall response rate (partial response or better) was 51.7% with a median duration of response of 16.8 months (range 56 days to 4.1 years), median progression-free survival of 4.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.0-18.4), and median overall survival of 34.3 months (95% CI: 19.2 to not reached). Hematologic, gastrointestinal, and constitutional adverse events were common and consistent with the side-effect profiles of the individual agents. Our results support further evaluation of this all-oral regimen in relapsed/refractory MM.

Isatuximab for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: review of key subgroup analyses from the Phase III ICARIA-MM study.

In the Phase III ICARIA-MM study (NCT02990338), the addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody isatuximab to pomalidomide and dexamethasone led to increased progression-free survival and improved response rates in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. There is an unmet treatment need, particularly among patients with poor prognoses, including those with high-risk cytogenetics, those who have renal impairment, those who are elderly and those who are refractory to prior lines of treatment. In this review, the subgroup analyses from the ICARIA-MM study, representing subpopulations with poor prognostic factors, are discussed. Overall, the addition of isatuximab to pomalidomide and dexamethasone improved progression-free survival and disease response rates across different subgroups, regardless of prognostic factor.

Lay abstract Currently, the majority of patients with multiple myeloma are not cured, and current treatments may not be helpful for patients with poor prognoses, including those with high-risk chromosomal changes, those who have impaired kidney function, those who are elderly and those who are refractory to prior treatments. In this review, we will discuss the benefits of the combination of isatuximab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in these difficult-to-treat patients.

Maintenance with daratumumab or observation following treatment with bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone with or without daratumumab and autologous stem-cell transplant in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (CASSIOPEIA): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: CASSIOPEIA part 1 showed superior depth of response and significantly improved progression-free survival with daratumumab, bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (D-VTd) versus bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd) as induction and consolidation in patients with autologous stem-cell transplant (ASCT)-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. In part 2, we compared daratumumab maintenance versus observation only. METHODS: CASSIOPEIA is a two-part, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial of patients aged 18-65 years with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, done in 111 European academic and community practice centres. In part 1, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to induction and consolidation with D-VTd or VTd. Patients still on study who had a partial response or better were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive web-response system to daratumumab 16 mg/kg intravenously every 8 weeks (a reduced frequency compared with standard daratumumab long-term dosing) or observation only for up to 2 years. Stratification factors were induction treatment and depth of response in part 1. The part 2 primary endpoint was progression-free survival from second randomisation. This preplanned interim analysis of progression-free survival was done after 281 events and shall be considered the primary analysis of progression-free survival. Sponsor personnel and designees who were involved in the analysis were masked to treatment group until the independent data monitoring committee recommended that the preplanned interim analysis be considered the main analysis of progression-free survival in part 2. Otherwise, treatment assignments were unmasked. The interaction between induction and consolidation and maintenance was tested at a two-sided significance level of 0·05 by a stratified Cox regression model that included the interaction term between maintenance treatment and induction and consolidation treatment. Efficacy analyses were done in the maintenance-specific intention-to-treat population, which comprised all patients who underwent second randomisation. Safety was analysed in all patients in the daratumumab group who received at least one dose and all patients randomly assigned to observation only. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02541383. Long-term follow-up is ongoing and the trial is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between May 30, 2016, and June 18, 2018, 886 patients (458 [84%] of 543 in the D-VTd group and 428 [79%] of 542 in the VTd group) were randomly assigned to daratumumab maintenance (n=442) or observation only (n=444). At a median follow-up of 35·4 months (IQR 30·2-39·9) from second randomisation, median progression-free survival was not reached (95% CI not evaluable [NE]-NE) with daratumumab versus 46·7 months (40·0-NE) with observation only (hazard ratio 0·53, 95% CI 0·42-0·68, p<0·0001). A prespecified analysis of progression-free survival results showed a significant interaction between maintenance and induction and consolidation therapy (p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were lymphopenia (16 [4%] of 440 patients in the daratumumab group vs eight [2%] of 444 patients in the observation-only group), hypertension (13 [3%] vs seven [2%]), and neutropenia (nine [2%] vs ten [2%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 100 (23%) patients in the daratumumab group and 84 (19%) patients in the observation-only group. In the daratumumab group, two adverse events led to death (septic shock and natural killer-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma); both were related to treatment. INTERPRETATION: Daratumumab maintenance every 8 weeks for 2 years significantly reduced the risk of disease progression or death compared with observation only. Longer follow-up and other ongoing studies will shed further light on the optimal daratumumab-containing post-ASCT maintenance treatment strategy. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development, the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome, and the Dutch-Belgian Cooperative Trial Group for Hematology Oncology.