Carfilzomib with immunomodulatory drugs for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Carfilzomib, a selective proteasome inhibitor (PI), is approved for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Combination regimens incorporating a PI and immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) have been associated with deep responses and extended survival in patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Carfilzomib-based combinations with immunomodulators are being extensively studied in the frontline setting. The objective of this review was to describe efficacy and safety data for carfilzomib-based, PI/immunomodulatory combinations in NDMM. Information sources were articles indexed in PubMed and abstracts from key hematology/oncology congresses published between January 2012 and December 2018. PubMed and congresses were searched for prospective clinical studies assessing the combination of carfilzomib with an IMiD for NDMM treatment. Retrospective and preclinical reports, case reports/series, reviews, and clinical studies not evaluating carfilzomib-immunomodulator combinations in NDMM were excluded based on review of titles and abstracts. A total of nine articles and 72 abstracts were deemed relevant and included in the review. A total of six distinct carfilzomib-based, PI/immunomodulator combination regimens have been evaluated in 12 clinical trials. Overall, treatment with these regimens has resulted in deep responses, including high rates of negativity for minimal residual disease. These deep responses have translated to long progression-free survival and overall survival rates. Efficacy results for these regimens have generally been consistent across subgroups defined by age, transplant eligibility, and cytogenetic risk. The safety profile of carfilzomib in NDMM is consistent with that observed in the relapsed-refractory MM setting. Clinical studies have found that carfilzomib-based combinations with immunomodulators are highly active with a favorable safety profile in NDMM. The carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) drug backbone is a promising foundation for treatment strategies aimed at achieving long-term, deep responses (functional cures) in the frontline setting. Several ongoing studies are evaluating KRd, with or without anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies.

Carfilzomib vs bortezomib in patients with multiple myeloma and renal failure: a subgroup analysis of ENDEAVOR.

In ENDEAVOR, carfilzomib (56 mg/m2) and dexamethasone (Kd56) demonstrated longer progression-free survival (PFS) over bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Here we evaluated Kd56 vs Vd by baseline renal function in a post hoc exploratory subgroup analysis. The intent-to-treat population included 929 patients (creatinine clearance [CrCL] ≥15 to <50 mL/min, n = 85 and n = 99; CrCL 50 to <80 mL/min, n = 186 and n = 177; and CrCL ≥80 mL/min, n = 193 and n = 189 for Kd56 and Vd arms, respectively). In these respective subgroups, median PFS was 14.9 vs 6.5 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.320-0.757), 18.6 vs 9.4 months (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.351-0.652), and not reached (NR) vs 12.2 months (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.434-0.827) for those receiving Kd56 vs Vd, respectively; median overall survival (OS) was 42.1 vs 23.7 months (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.443-0.989), 42.5 vs 32.8 months (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.626-1.104), and NR vs 42.3 months (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.554-1.009). Complete renal response (ie, CrCL improvement to ≥60 mL/min in any 2 consecutive visits if baseline CrCL <50 mL/min) rates were 15.3% (95% CI, 8.4-24.7) and 14.1% (95% CI, 8.0-22.6) for those receiving Kd56 vs Vd, respectively. In a combined Kd56 and Vd analysis, complete renal responders had longer median PFS (14.1 vs 9.4 months; HR, 0.805; 95% CI, 0.438-1.481) and OS (35.3 vs 29.7 months; HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.524-1.577) vs nonresponders. Grade ≥3 adverse event rates in the respective subgroups were 87.1% vs 79.4%, 84.4% vs 71.8%, and 77.1% vs 65.9% for those receiving Kd56 vs Vd, respectively. Thus, Kd56 demonstrated PFS and OS improvements over Vd in RRMM patients regardless of their baseline renal function. The ENDEAVOR trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01568866.

Role of Proteasome Inhibitors in Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

Proteasome inhibition is an established treatment strategy for patients with multiple myeloma as proteasome inhibitors (PIs) selectively target and disrupt the protein metabolism of aberrant plasma cells. Since the introduction of the first-in-class PIs bortezomib, the therapeutic landscape for multiple myeloma has shifted with the development of next-generation PIs (carfilzomib and ixazomib) and new classes of agents. Treatment with modern combination therapies has been shown to result in deep responses and improved outcomes, and these potent regimens are increasingly used as frontline therapy. As patients continue to live longer with modern frontline therapy, there will be an increased need for effective regimens after initial treatment failure. Several recent studies have shown that treatment with combination therapy incorporating PIs induces deep and durable responses in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma. In this review, we review pivotal data and discuss the role of PIs-based doublet and triplet regimens for the management of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in the era of modern combination therapy.

Analysis of carfilzomib cardiovascular safety profile across relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma clinical trials.

Carfilzomib is a selective proteasome inhibitor approved for the treatment of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). It has significantly improved outcomes, including overall survival (OS), and shown superiority vs standard treatment with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone and bortezomib plus dexamethasone. The incidence rate of cardiovascular (CV) events with carfilzomib treatment has varied across trials. This analysis evaluated phase 1-3 trials with >2000 RRMM patients exposed to carfilzomib to describe the incidence of CV adverse events (AEs). In addition, the individual CV safety data of >1000 patients enrolled in the carfilzomib arm of phase 3 studies were compared with the control arms to assess the benefit-risk profile of carfilzomib. Pooling data across carfilzomib trials, the CV AEs (grade ≥3) noted included hypertension (5.9%), dyspnea (4.5%), and cardiac failure (4.4%). Although patients receiving carfilzomib had a numeric increase in the rates of any-grade and grade ≥3 cardiac failure, dyspnea, and hypertension, the frequency of discontinuation or death due to these cardiac events was low and comparable between the carfilzomib and control arms. Serial echocardiography in a blinded cardiac substudy showed no objective evidence of cardiac dysfunction in the carfilzomib and control arms. Moreover, carfilzomib had no significant effect on cardiac repolarization. Our results, including the OS benefit, showed that the benefit of carfilzomib treatment in terms of reducing progression or death outweighed the risk for developing cardiac failure or hypertension in most patients. Appropriate carfilzomib administration and risk factor management are recommended for elderly patients and patients with underlying risk factors.

Carfilzomib-dexamethasone versus subcutaneous or intravenous bortezomib in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: secondary analysis of the phase 3 ENDEAVOR study.

This is a secondary analysis of the phase 3 ENDEAVOR study comparing relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients receiving carfilzomib-dexamethasone (Kd) with those receiving subcutaneous (SC) bortezomib with dexamethasone (Vd) or intravenous (IV) Vd. Of Kd-treated patients, 356 Kd were pre-selected (by physician prior to randomization if to be randomized to Vd) for SC Vd (Kd [SC Vd]) and 108 for IV Vd (Kd [IV Vd], respectively. Of Vd-treated patients, 360 received SC Vd and 75 IV Vd. Kd (SC Vd) median PFS was not reached; SC Vd was 9.5 months. Median PFS for Kd (IV Vd) and IV Vd were 22.2 and 8.5 months, respectively. Median PFS was significantly longer and response rates were higher for Kd versus retreatment with bortezomib (SC or IV Vd) and in bortezomib naive patients. Overall, Kd was superior to Vd in RRMM regardless of route of bortezomib administration or prior bortezomib exposure.