The role of 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging in Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia.

Disease assessment in WM is dependent on the quantification of the IgM monoclonal protein and percent involvement of the bone marrow. There is a need for imaging studies that objectively measure tumor load in these patients. In this study, we sought to examine the role of combined FDG-PET/CT imaging in the detection of tumor load and in the assessment of response to therapy. Thirty-five patients were enrolled on a prospective study using bortezomib and rituximab therapy and were included in this study because they completed a pre- and post-treatment FDG-PET/CT imaging at one facility (12 newly diagnosed and 23 relapsed/refractory). The use of combined FDG-PET/CT imaging showed positive findings in 83% of patients with WM, unlike prior studies using conventional imaging that indicate that only 20% of patients have lymphadenopathy or hepatosplenomegaly. Moreover, 43% of patients had abnormal bone marrow uptake on FDG-PET imaging that can potentially help in the assessment of their tumor load, especially with heterogenous sampling of the bone marrow. There was no statistical correlation between EORTC response criteria for FDG-PET/CT and response by monoclonal protein. This is the first study to examine the role of FDG-PET/CT imaging in WM. Future studies should examine the role of FDG-PET/CT in conjunction with monoclonal protein response in the assessment of progression-free survival in patients with WM.

The role of serum immunoglobulin free light chain in response and progression in waldenstrom macroglobulinemia.

INTRODUCTION: The serum free light chain (sFLC) has been widely used in the assessment of response in patients with multiple myeloma and other plasma cell dyscrasias. However, its use in Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) has not been previously assessed. We sought to examine the role of sFLC in response and progression of patients with WM. METHODS: This study was conducted in a cohort of 48 patients with a diagnosis of WM, untreated (n = 20) or relapsed/refractory (n = 28), prospectively treated on a bortezomib and rituximab trial. RESULTS: Involved FLC (iFLC) response occurred in 79% patients versus 60% by M-spike protocol criteria. The median time to response was shorter with iFLC than per protocol (2.1 and 3.7 months; P = 0.05). Progression defined using iFLC also correlated well to progression in the protocol (κ = 0.63). However, the median time to progression (TTP) was more rapid by iFLC than per protocol (13.7 and 18.9 months). We also confirmed that a flare in iFLC in post-rituximab therapy did not correlate with lack of response or shorter TTP. CONCLUSION: Involved sFLC may be a useful marker of tumor measurement, showing earlier response and progression compared with IgM or M-spike measurements.

Weekly bortezomib in combination with temsirolimus in relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: a multicentre, phase 1/2, open-label, dose-escalation study.

BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma is the second most prevalent haematological malignancy and is incurable. Our aim was to assess the response and safety of the combination of temsirolimus (an mTOR inhibitor) and bortezomib in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS: We did an open-label, dose-escalation study in three centres in the USA. Patients were enrolled from June, 2007, to December, 2009. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma after one or more treatment (including lenalidomide, bortezomib, or thalidomide), with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Patients were assigned a dose level in the order of their entry into the study. Phase 1 was to assess the safety and establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination and phase 2 was to assess overall response rate at the MTD. Intravenous temsirolimus was given at 15 or 25 mg and intravenous bortezomib at 1·3 or 1·6 mg/m(2) once a week, with dose escalation until dose-limiting adverse events were recorded in two of the three people in the dose cohort. Use of steroids were not permitted. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a partial response or better. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis, with all patients who had been enrolled included. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00483262. FINDINGS: 20 patients were enrolled into the phase 1 study and 43 into phase 2. All patients were heavily pretreated (median five lines in the phase 1 cohort, and four lines in the phase 2 cohort). The MTD was determined to be 1·6 mg/m(2) bortezomib on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 in combination with 25 mg temsirolimus on days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29, for a cycle of 35 days. In the phase 2 study, the proportion of patients with a partial response or better was 33% (14 of 43; 90% CI 21-47). Long-term follow-up of patients is ongoing. There were three deaths during treatment in the phase 1 and 2 studies: one patient died of septic shock in the phase 1 study; one patient died with H1N1 influenza infection and one died with cardiac amyloid and ventricular arrhythmia unrelated to treatment in the phase 2 study. In the phase 1 study, the most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (13 patients), lymphopenia (ten), neutropenia (nine), leucopenia (seven), and anaemia (five). In the phase 2 study, the most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (25 patients), lymphopenia (24), neutropenia (17), leucopenia (ten), anaemia (seven), and diarrhoea (five). Four patients in the phase 1 study had sensory peripheral neuropathy (grade 2 or less); in the phase 2 study, 11 had sensory peripheral neuropathy (all grade 2 or less) and seven motor peripheral neuropathy (one grade 3, six grade 2 or less). INTERPRETATION: mTOR inhibitors could have a role in combination with weekly bortezomib for the treatment of patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma without the addition of steroids. FUNDING: Millennium Inc, Pfizer Inc, Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation, and the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society.