Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
2.
Future Oncol ; 20(3): 131-143, 2024 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37807952

RESUMO

Aim: To compare the effectiveness of in-class transition to all-oral ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) following parenteral bortezomib (V)-based induction versus continued V-based therapy in US oncology clinics. Patients & methods: Non-transplant eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) receiving in-class transition to IRd (N = 100; US MM-6), or V-based therapy (N = 111; INSIGHT MM). Results: Following inverse probability of treatment weighting, overall response rate was 73.2% with IRd versus 57.5% with V-based therapy (p < 0.0001). Median duration of treatment was 10.8 versus 5.3 months (p < 0.0001). Overall, 18/24% of patients discontinued IRd/V-based therapy due to adverse events. Conclusion: IRd after V-based induction was associated with significantly improved overall response rate and duration of treatment than continued V-based combination therapy. Clinical Trial Registration: US MM-6: NCT03173092; INSIGHT MM: NCT02761187 (ClinicalTrials.gov).


Assuntos
Mieloma Múltiplo , Humanos , Mieloma Múltiplo/diagnóstico , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Bortezomib/efeitos adversos , Lenalidomida/uso terapêutico , Dexametasona , Glicina , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Compostos de Boro/efeitos adversos
3.
Nat Med ; 29(10): 2570-2576, 2023 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37783970

RESUMO

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma cell malignancy expressing B cell maturation antigen (BCMA). Elranatamab, a bispecific antibody, engages BCMA on MM and CD3 on T cells. The MagnetisMM-1 trial evaluated its safety, pharmacokinetics and efficacy. Primary endpoints, including the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities as well as objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR), were met. Secondary efficacy endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Eighty-eight patients with relapsed or refractory MM received elranatamab monotherapy, and 55 patients received elranatamab at efficacious doses. Patients had received a median of five prior regimens; 90.9% were triple-class refractory, 29.1% had high cytogenetic risk and 23.6% received prior BCMA-directed therapy. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed during dose escalation. Adverse events included cytopenias and cytokine release syndrome. Exposure was dose proportional. With a median follow-up of 12.0 months, the ORR was 63.6% and 38.2% of patients achieving complete response or better. For responders, the median DOR was 17.1 months. All 13 patients evaluable for minimal residual disease achieved negativity. Even after prior BCMA-directed therapy, 53.8% achieved response. For all 55 patients, median PFS was 11.8 months, and median OS was 21.2 months. Elranatamab achieved durable responses, manageable safety and promising survival for patients with MM. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03269136 .


Assuntos
Anemia , Mieloma Múltiplo , Humanos , Mieloma Múltiplo/patologia , Antígeno de Maturação de Linfócitos B , Linfócitos T/patologia , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Anemia/etiologia , Imunoterapia Adotiva/efeitos adversos
4.
Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk ; 23(3): e171-e181, 2023 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36641358

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Infections are a common reason for hospitalization and death in multiple myeloma (MM). Although pneumococcal vaccination (PV) and influenza vaccination (FV) are recommended for MM patients, data on vaccination status and outcomes are limited in MM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We utilized data from the global, prospective, observational INSIGHT MM study to analyze FV and PV rates and associated outcomes of patients with MM enrolled 2016-2019. RESULTS: Of the 4307 patients enrolled, 2543 and 2500 had study-entry data on FV and PV status. Overall vaccination rates were low (FV 39.6%, PV 30.2%) and varied by region. On separate multivariable analyses of overall survival (OS) by Cox model, FV in the prior 2 years and PV in the prior 5 years impacted OS (vs. no vaccination; FV: HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60-0.90; P = .003; PV: HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.42-0.63; P < .0001) when adjusted for age, region, performance status, disease stage, cytogenetics at diagnosis, MM symptoms, disease status, time since diagnosis, and prior transplant. Proportions of deaths due to infections were lower among vaccinated versus non-vaccinated patients (FV: 9.8% vs. 15.3%, P = .142; PV: 9.9% vs. 18.0%, P = .032). Patients with FV had generally lower health resource utilization (HRU) versus patients without FV; patients with PV had higher or similar HRU versus patients without PV. CONCLUSION: Vaccination is important in MM and should be encouraged. Vaccination status should be recorded in prospective clinical trials as it may affect survival. This trial was registered at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov as #NCT02761187.


Assuntos
Influenza Humana , Mieloma Múltiplo , Humanos , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Estudos Prospectivos , Hospitalização , Vacinação
5.
Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program ; 2022(1): 539-550, 2022 12 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36485145

RESUMO

The development of new drugs and subsequent novel combinations for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) has resulted in a plethora of treatment options that can make the choice of initial induction therapy a challenge. A greater understanding of both patient- and disease-specific factors can provide a personalized approach to help design a treatment course. Historically, the choice of an induction regimen has been tethered to an initial impression of transplant eligibility at the time of diagnosis. As more effective and better-tolerated induction regimens have emerged, there has been increasing overlap in the induction strategies used for all patients with NDMM, which increasingly provide the ultimate goal of deep and durable remissions. The current treatment options and strategies for the management of NDMM are evaluated using the best available data to provide a rationale for these decisions.


Assuntos
Transplante de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas , Mieloma Múltiplo , Humanos , Mieloma Múltiplo/terapia , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Transplante de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas/métodos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Bortezomib/uso terapêutico
6.
Future Oncol ; 17(19): 2499-2512, 2021 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33769076

RESUMO

Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in routine clinical practice. Patients & methods: Patient-level data from the global, observational INSIGHT MM and the Czech Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies were integrated and analyzed. Results: At data cut-off, 263 patients from 13 countries were included. Median time from diagnosis to start of IRd was 35.8 months; median duration of follow-up was 14.8 months. Overall response rate was 73%, median progression-free survival, 21.2 months and time-to-next therapy, 33.0 months. Ixazomib/lenalidomide dose reductions were required in 17%/36% of patients; 32%/30% of patients discontinued ixazomib/lenalidomide due to adverse events. Conclusion: The effectiveness and safety of IRd in routine clinical practice are comparable to those reported in TOURMALINE-MM1. Clinical trial registration: NCT02761187 (ClinicalTrials.gov).


Lay abstract Proteasome inhibitors are drugs used in multiple myeloma (MM), a blood cancer that develops from cells in the bone marrow. Ixazomib is the first oral proteasome inhibitor to be approved for use in MM, when given in combination with two other oral drugs, lenalidomide and dexamethasone, to adult patients who have received one prior therapy. Our study, which was conducted in routine clinical practice, found that the effectiveness and safety of ixazomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone in previously treated MM patients were similar to those seen in the Phase III clinical trial on which approval was based. These findings are important because they suggest that MM patients in everyday practice can achieve the same benefits from this treatment as patients in clinical trials, despite often being in poorer health.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Compostos de Boro/administração & dosagem , Compostos de Boro/efeitos adversos , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Resistencia a Medicamentos Antineoplásicos , Feminino , Glicina/administração & dosagem , Glicina/efeitos adversos , Glicina/análogos & derivados , Humanos , Lenalidomida/administração & dosagem , Lenalidomida/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mieloma Múltiplo/mortalidade , Mieloma Múltiplo/patologia , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/mortalidade , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Estudos Prospectivos
7.
Blood Cancer J ; 11(2): 40, 2021 02 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33602913

RESUMO

Treatment options in multiple myeloma (MM) are increasing with the introduction of complex multi-novel-agent-based regimens investigated in randomized clinical trials. However, application in the real-world setting, including feasibility of and adherence to these regimens, may be limited due to varying patient-, treatment-, and disease-related factors. Furthermore, approximately 40% of real-world MM patients do not meet the criteria for phase 3 studies on which approvals are based, resulting in a lack of representative phase 3 data for these patients. Therefore, treatment decisions must be tailored based on additional considerations beyond clinical trial efficacy and safety, such as treatment feasibility (including frequency of clinic/hospital attendance), tolerability, effects on quality of life (QoL), and impact of comorbidities. There are multiple factors of importance to real-world MM patients, including disease symptoms, treatment burden and toxicities, ability to participate in daily activities, financial burden, access to treatment and treatment centers, and convenience of treatment. All of these factors are drivers of QoL and treatment satisfaction/compliance. Importantly, given the heterogeneity of MM, individual patients may have different perspectives regarding the most relevant considerations and goals of their treatment. Patient perspectives/goals may also change as they move through their treatment course. Thus, the 'efficacy' of treatment means different things to different patients, and treatment decision-making in the context of personalized medicine must be guided by an individual's composite definition of what constitutes the best treatment choice. This review summarizes the various factors of importance and practical issues that must be considered when determining real-world treatment choices. It assesses the current instruments, methodologies, and recent initiatives for analyzing the MM patient experience. Finally, it suggests options for enhancing data collection on patients and treatments to provide a more holistic definition of the effectiveness of a regimen in the real-world setting.


Assuntos
Mieloma Múltiplo/terapia , Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Ensaios Clínicos Fase III como Assunto , Gerenciamento Clínico , Humanos , Qualidade de Vida , Resultado do Tratamento
8.
Br J Haematol ; 180(6): 821-830, 2018 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29435979

RESUMO

Novel therapies with unique new targets are needed for patients who are relapsed/refractory to current treatments for multiple myeloma. Ibrutinib is a first-in-class, once-daily, oral covalent inhibitor of Bruton tyrosine kinase, which is overexpressed in the myeloma stem cell population. This study examined various doses of ibrutinib ± low-dose dexamethasone in patients who received ≥2 prior lines of therapy, including an immunomodulatory agent. Daily ibrutinib ± weekly dexamethasone 40 mg was assessed in 4 cohorts using a Simon 2-stage design. The primary objective was clinical benefit rate (CBR; ≥minimal response); secondary objectives included safety. Patients (n = 92) received a median of 4 prior regimens. Ibrutinib + dexamethasone produced the highest CBR (28%) in Cohort 4 (840 mg + dexamethasone; n = 43), with median duration of 9·2 months (range, 3·0-14·7). Progression-free survival was 4·6 months (range, 0·4-17·3). Grade 3-4 haematological adverse events included anaemia (16%), thrombocytopenia (11%), and neutropenia (2%); grade 3-4 non-haematological adverse events included pneumonia (7%), syncope (3%) and urinary tract infection (3%). Ibrutinib + dexamethasone produced notable responses in this heavily pre-treated population. The encouraging efficacy, coupled with the favourable safety and tolerability profile of ibrutinib, supports its further evaluation as part of combination treatment.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiplo/mortalidade , Adenina/análogos & derivados , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/efeitos adversos , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Piperidinas , Pirazóis/administração & dosagem , Pirazóis/efeitos adversos , Pirimidinas/administração & dosagem , Pirimidinas/efeitos adversos , Recidiva , Taxa de Sobrevida
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...