A fixed-duration, measurable residual disease-guided approach in CLL: follow-up data from the phase 2 ICLL-07 FILO trial.

Trials assessing first-line, fixed-duration approaches in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are yielding promising activity, but few long-term data are available. We report follow-up data from a phase 2 trial (ICLL07 FILO) in previously untreated, medically fit patients (N = 135). Patients underwent obinutuzumab-ibrutinib induction for 9 months; then, following evaluation (N = 130 evaluable), those in complete remission and with bone marrow measurable residual disease (BM MRD) <0.01% (n = 10) received ibrutinib for 6 additional months; those in partial remission and/or with BM MRD ≥0.01%, the majority (n = 120), also received 4 cycles of immunochemotherapy (fludarabine/cyclophosphamide-obinutuzumab). Beyond end of treatment, responses were assessed every 3 month and peripheral blood MRD every 6 months. At median follow-up 36.7 months from treatment start, progression-free and overall survival rates (95% confidence interval) at 3 years were 95.7% (92.0% to 99.5%) and 98% (95.1% to 100%), respectively. Peripheral blood MRD <0.01% rates were 97%, 96%, 90%, 84%, and 89% at months 16, 22, 28, 34, and 40, respectively. No new treatment-related or serious adverse event occurred beyond end of treatment. Thus, in previously untreated, medically fit patients with CLL, a fixed-duration (15 months), MRD-guided approach achieved high survival rates, a persistent MRD benefit beyond the end of treatment, and low long-term toxicity. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02666898.

Pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myeloma.

It is important to have an effective therapy for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) at first relapse, particularly if an autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is considered at this stage. This multicenter, phase 2 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of weekly oral pomalidomide-cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone (PCD) in patients with MM in first relapse after treatment with lenalidomide-bortezomib-dexamethasone (RVD). All patients had received RVD as induction and consolidation therapy, plus lenalidomide maintenance for 1 year (arm A). Half had also received an ASCT after induction (arm B). At MM relapse, all patients received 4 oral cycles of pomalidomide 4 mg (days 1-21), cyclophosphamide 300 mg (days 1, 8, 15, and 22), and dexamethasone 40 mg (days 1-4 and days 15-18 of a 28-day cycle; PCD). Responding patients in arm A underwent ASCT and received 2 additional cycles of PCD, whereas those in arm B received 5 cycles of PCD. All patients received pomalidomide-dexamethasone maintenance until disease progression. Primary end point was partial remission or better after the initial 4 cycles of PCD. Responses were obtained in 82/97 (85%) patients evaluated: complete remission (n = 1; 1%), very good partial remission (n = 32; 33%), and partial remission (n = 49; 51%). Three patients (3%) had stable disease, and 6 (6%) had disease progression (6 response failures). Forty-five (94%) of the 48 patients in arm A underwent planned ASCT. PCD was effective therapy after first relapse with RVD. After 4 cycles, the rate of partial remission or better was 85%, and 94% of planned ASCTs were performed. Toxicity was mostly hematologic and manageable. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02244125.

Minimal residual disease negativity using deep sequencing is a major prognostic factor in multiple myeloma.

The introduction of novel agents has led to major improvements in clinical outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma. To shorten evaluation times for new treatments, health agencies are currently examining minimal residual disease (MRD) as a surrogate end point in clinical trials. We assessed the prognostic value of MRD, measured during maintenance therapy by next-generation sequencing (NGS). MRD negativity was defined as the absence of tumor plasma cell within 1 000 000 bone marrow cells (<10-6). Data were analyzed from a recent clinical trial that evaluated the role of transplantation in newly diagnosed myeloma patients treated with lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD). MRD negativity was achieved at least once during maintenance in 127 patients (25%). At the start of maintenance therapy, MRD was a strong prognostic factor for both progression-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.34; P < .001) and overall survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.54; P = .001). Patients who were MRD negative had a higher probability of prolonged progression-free survival than patients with detectable residual disease, regardless of treatment group (RVD vs transplant), cytogenetic risk profile, or International Staging System disease stage at diagnosis. These results were similar after completion of maintenance therapy. Our findings confirm the value of MRD status, as determined by NGS, as a prognostic biomarker in multiple myeloma, and suggest that this approach could be used to adapt treatment strategies in future clinical trials.

Efficacy of venetoclax as targeted therapy for relapsed/refractory t(11;14) multiple myeloma.

Venetoclax is a selective, orally bioavailable BCL-2 inhibitor that induces cell death in multiple myeloma (MM) cells, particularly in those harboring t(11;14), which express high levels of BCL-2 relative to BCL-XL and MCL-1. In this phase 1 study, patients with relapsed/refractory MM received venetoclax monotherapy. After a 2-week lead-in with weekly dose escalation, daily venetoclax was given at 300, 600, 900, or 1200 mg in dose-escalation cohorts and 1200 mg in the safety expansion. Dexamethasone could be added on progression during treatment. Sixty-six patients were enrolled (30, dose-escalation cohorts; 36, safety expansion). Patients received a median of 5 prior therapies (range, 1-15); 61% were bortezomib and lenalidomide double refractory, and 46% had t(11;14). Venetoclax was generally well tolerated. Most common adverse events included mild gastrointestinal symptoms (nausea [47%], diarrhea [36%], vomiting [21%]). Cytopenias were the most common grade 3/4 events, with thrombocytopenia (32%), neutropenia (27%), anemia (23%), and leukopenia (23%) reported. The overall response rate (ORR) was 21% (14/66), and 15% achieved very good partial response or better (≥VGPR). Most responses (12/14 [86%]) were reported in patients with t(11;14). In this group, ORR was 40%, with 27% of patients achieving ≥VGPR. Biomarker analysis confirmed that response to venetoclax correlated with higher BCL2:BCL2L1 and BCL2:MCL1 mRNA expression ratios. Venetoclax monotherapy at a daily dose up to 1200 mg has an acceptable safety profile and evidence of single-agent antimyeloma activity in patients with relapsed/refractory MM, predominantly in patients with t(11;14) abnormality and those with a favorable BCL2 family profile. Registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov: #NCT01794520.

Apixaban for the prevention of thromboembolism in immunomodulatory-treated myeloma patients: Myelaxat, a phase 2 pilot study.

The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is higher in myeloma patients receiving immunomodulatory compounds. A VTE prophylaxis using low-molecular-weight heparin or aspirin is therefore proposed. Apixaban is an oral direct anti-Xa. Several studies have shown the efficacy and safety of apixaban in VTE prophylaxis compared to enoxaparin. The objective of this prospective phase 2 pilot study was to assess the risk of VTE and bleeding in patients with myeloma treated with immunomodulatory compounds lenalidomide (len) or thalidomide (thal), using apixaban in a preventive scheme. Myeloma patients requiring Melphalan-Prednisone-Thalidomide in the first line, or Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone in the relapse setting received apixaban, 2.5 mg x 2/day for 6 months. Venous (pulmonary embolism-PE, or symptomatic proximal or distal deep vein thrombosis-DVT, or all proximal asymptomatic events detected by systematic proximal bilateral compression ultrasound) or arterial thrombotic events, and bleeding events (ISTH 2005) were registered. One hundred and four patients were enrolled (mean age 69.8 ± 7.8 years), 11 in first line and 93 in relapse. Two venous thrombotic events were observed, for example, an asymptomatic proximal DVT and a symptomatic distal DVT, in the context of apixaban stopped 14 days before, due to lenalidomide-induced thrombocytopenia. No PE or arterial cardiovascular events were reported. Only one major and 11 CRNM hemorrhages were reported. These data must now be confirmed on a randomized large study.

Randomized phase 2 study: elotuzumab plus bortezomib/dexamethasone vs bortezomib/dexamethasone for relapsed/refractory MM.

In this proof-of-concept, open-label, phase 2 study, patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) received elotuzumab with bortezomib and dexamethasone (EBd) or bortezomib and dexamethasone (Bd) until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary/exploratory endpoints included overall response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). Two-sided 0.30 significance level was specified (80% power, 103 events) to detect hazard ratio (HR) of 0.69. Efficacy and safety analyses were performed on all randomized patients and all treated patients, respectively. Of 152 randomized patients (77 EBd, 75 Bd), 150 were treated (75 EBd, 75 Bd). PFS was greater with EBd vs Bd (HR, 0.72; 70% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.88; stratified log-rank P = .09); median PFS was longer with EBd (9.7 months) vs Bd (6.9 months). In an updated analysis, EBd-treated patients homozygous for the high-affinity FcγRIIIa allele had median PFS of 22.3 months vs 9.8 months in EBd-treated patients homozygous for the low-affinity allele. ORR was 66% (EBd) vs 63% (Bd). Very good partial response or better occurred in 36% of patients (EBd) vs 27% (Bd). Early OS results, based on 40 deaths, revealed an HR of 0.61 (70% CI, 0.43-0.85). To date, 60 deaths have occurred (28 EBd, 32 Bd). No additional clinically significant adverse events occurred with EBd vs Bd. Grade 1/2 infusion reaction rate was low (5% EBd) and mitigated with premedication. In patients with RRMM, elotuzumab, an immunostimulatory antibody, appears to provide clinical benefit without added clinically significant toxicity when combined with Bd vs Bd alone. Registered to ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01478048.

VTD is superior to VCD prior to intensive therapy in multiple myeloma: results of the prospective IFM2013-04 trial.

The Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome conducted a randomized trial to compare bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) with bortezomib-cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone (VCD) as induction before high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Overall, a total of 340 patients were centrally randomly assigned to receive VTD or VCD. After 4 cycles, on an intent-to-treat basis, 66.3% of the patients in the VTD arm achieved at least a very good partial response (primary end point) vs 56.2% in the VCD arm (P = .05). In addition, the overall response rate was significantly higher in the VTD arm (92.3% vs 83.4% in the VCD arm; P = .01). Hematologic toxicity was higher in the VCD arm, with significantly increased rates of grade 3 and 4 anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia. On the other hand, the rate of peripheral neuropathy (PN) was significantly higher in the VTD arm. With the exception of hematologic adverse events and PN, other grade 3 or 4 toxicities were rare, with no significant differences between the VTD and VCD arms. Our data support the preferential use of VTD rather than VCD in preparation for ASCT. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01564537 and at EudraCT as #2013-003174-27.

Serum free light chains, not urine specimens, should be used to evaluate response in light-chain multiple myeloma.

Guidelines for monitoring multiple myeloma (MM) patients expressing light chains only (light-chain MM [LCMM]) rely on measurements of monoclonal protein in urine. Alternatively, serum free light chain (sFLC) measurements have better sensitivity over urine methods, however, demonstration that improved sensitivity provides any clinical benefit is lacking. Here, we compared performance of serum and urine measurements in 113 (72κ, 41λ) newly diagnosed LCMM patients enrolled in the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome (IFM) 2009 trial. All diagnostic samples (100%) had an abnormal κ:λ sFLC ratio, and involved (monoclonal) FLC (iFLC) expressed at levels deemed measurable for monitoring (≥100 mg/L). By contrast, only 64% patients had measurable levels of monoclonal protein (≥200 mg per 24 hours) in urine protein electrophoresis (UPEP). After 1 and 3 treatment cycles, iFLC remained elevated in 71% and 46% of patients, respectively, whereas UPEP reported a positive result in 37% and 18%; all of the patients with positive UPEP at cycle 3 also had elevated iFLC levels. Importantly, elevated iFLC or an abnormal κ:λ sFLC ratio after 3 treatment cycles associated with poorer progression-free survival (P = .006 and P < .0001, respectively), whereas positive UPEP or urine immunofixation electrophoresis (uIFE) did not. In addition, patients with an abnormal κ:λ sFLC ratio had poorer overall survival (P = .022). Finally, early normalization of κ:λ sFLC ratio but not negative uIFE predicted achieving negative minimal residual disease, as determined by flow cytometry, after consolidation therapy (100% positive predictive value). We conclude that improved sensitivity and prognostic value of serum over urine measurements provide a strong basis for recommending the former for monitoring LCMM patients.

Salvage therapy post pomalidomide-based regimen in relapsed/refractory myeloma.

The combination of pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (Pom-Dex) has proved effective and safe in patients with end-stage relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), otherwise characterized by a very poor outcome. MM remains an incurable disease with unavoidable relapses, and the outcome after pomalidomide is still dismal. However, some patients demonstrate prolonged survival even beyond pomalidomide therapy.We sought to analyze the treatment of RRMM patients following Pom-Dex therapy and the response and survival after this next treatment line.We studied 134 patients treated with Pom-Dex until progression across two IFM studies. Seventy percent of these patients received further therapy after Pom-Dex. Among the treated patients, one third responded and one third maintained stable disease. The median OS for treated patients was 12 months (6.5;17), with 22 and 12.5% of patients surviving beyond 2 and 3 years, respectively. The factors associated with a better outcome were exposure to a triplet-based regimen containing a novel agent, response to therapy, absence of adverse cytogenetic, and a longer time from diagnosis to post pomalidomide therapy.This study suggests that patients relapsing after Pom-Dex therapy can still benefit from a further line of treatment. A subset of these treated patients even displayed a prolonged OS, while the prognosis remained very poor without treatment. An active approach could therefore be recommended even in this adverse situation, however guided by the patients' prognosis factors.

Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in multiple myeloma with deletion 17p and/or translocation (4;14): IFM 2010-02 trial results.

The combination of pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (Pom-Dex) can be safely administered to patients with end-stage relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). However, we observed a shorter median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in these patients when characterized with adverse cytogenetics (deletion 17p and translocation [4;14]) in the Intergroupe Francophone Myélome (IFM) 2009-02 trial. We then sought to determine whether MM with adverse cytogenetics would benefit more from Pom-Dex if exposed earlier in the multicenter IFM 2010-02 trial. The intention-to-treat population included 50 patients, with a median age of 63 years (38% were ≥65 years). Interestingly, there was a striking difference in time to progression (TTP), duration of response, and overall response rate (ORR) according to the presence of del(17p) compared with t(4;14) (TTP, 7.3 vs 2.8 months; duration of response, 8.3 vs 2.4 months; and ORR, 32% vs 15%). OS was prolonged after Pom-Dex, particularly in t(4;14), given the short TTP, suggesting that patients were rescued at relapse with further lines of therapy. Pom-Dex, a doublet immunomodulatory drug-based regimen, is active and well tolerated in adverse cytogenetic patients with early RRMM, particularly in those with del(17p), who are characterized by a high and rapid development of a refractoriness state and known for their poor prognosis. Future studies will determine the underlying mechanisms of Pom-Dex activity in del(17p). This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01745640.

Effect of High-Cutoff Hemodialysis vs Conventional Hemodialysis on Hemodialysis Independence Among Patients With Myeloma Cast Nephropathy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Cast nephropathy is the main cause of acute kidney injury in multiple myeloma and persistent reduction in kidney function strongly affects prognosis. Strategies to rapidly remove nephrotoxic serum-free light chains combined with novel antimyeloma agents have not been evaluated prospectively. Objective: To compare the hemodialysis independence rate among patients newly diagnosed with myeloma cast nephropathy treated with hemodialysis using a high-cutoff dialyzer (with very large membrane pores and high permeability to immunoglobulin light chains) or a conventional high-flux dialyzer (with small pores and lower permeability). Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial involving 98 patients with biopsy-proven myeloma cast nephropathy requiring hemodialysis treated at 48 French centers between July 2011 and June 2016; the final date of follow-up was June 29, 2016. Interventions: Intensive hemodialysis (eight 5-hour sessions over 10 days) with either a high-cutoff dialyzer (46 patients) or a conventional high-flux dialyzer (48 patients). All patients received the same chemotherapy regimen of bortezomib and dexamethasone. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end point was hemodialysis independence at 3 months; secondary end points: hemodialysis independence rates at 6 and 12 months, hemodialysis- and chemotherapy-related adverse events, and death. Results: Among 98 randomized patients, 94 (96%) (median age, 68.8 years [interquartile range, 61.2-75.3 years]; 45% women) were included in the modified intent-to-treat analysis. The hemodialysis independence rate at 3 months was 41.3% (n = 19) in the high-cutoff hemodialysis group vs 33.3% (n = 16) in the conventional hemodialysis group (between-group difference, 8.0% [95% CI, -12.0% to 27.9%], P = .42); at 6 months, the rate was 56.5% (n = 26) vs 35.4% (n = 17), respectively (between-group difference, 21.1% [95% CI, 0.9% to 41.3%], P = .04); and at 12 months, the rate was 60.9% (n = 28) vs 37.5% (n = 18) (between-group difference, 23.4% [95% CI, 3.2% to 43.5%], P = .02). The incidence of hemodialysis-related adverse events was 43% in the high-cutoff hemodialysis group vs 39% in the conventional hemodialysis group; chemotherapy-related serious adverse events, 39% vs 37%, respectively; and at 12 months, 9 patients vs 10 patients died. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with myeloma cast nephropathy treated with a bortezomib-based chemotherapy regimen, the use of high-cutoff hemodialysis compared with conventional hemodialysis did not result in a statistically significant difference in hemodialysis independence at 3 months. However, the study may have been underpowered to identify an early clinically important difference. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01208818.

Lenalidomide maintenance after stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation is a standard treatment for young patients with multiple myeloma. Residual disease is almost always present after transplantation and is responsible for relapse. This phase 3, placebo-controlled trial investigated the efficacy of lenalidomide maintenance therapy after transplantation. METHODS: We randomly assigned 614 patients younger than 65 years of age who had nonprogressive disease after first-line transplantation to maintenance treatment with either lenalidomide (10 mg per day for the first 3 months, increased to 15 mg if tolerated) or placebo until relapse. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: Lenalidomide maintenance therapy improved median progression-free survival (41 months, vs. 23 months with placebo; hazard ratio, 0.50; P<0.001). This benefit was observed across all patient subgroups, including those based on the ß(2)-microglobulin level, cytogenetic profile, and response after transplantation. With a median follow-up period of 45 months, more than 70% of patients in both groups were alive at 4 years. The rates of grade 3 or 4 peripheral neuropathy were similar in the two groups. The incidence of second primary cancers was 3.1 per 100 patient-years in the lenalidomide group versus 1.2 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group (P=0.002). Median event-free survival (with events that included second primary cancers) was significantly improved with lenalidomide (40 months, vs. 23 months with placebo; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Lenalidomide maintenance after transplantation significantly prolonged progression-free and event-free survival among patients with multiple myeloma. Four years after randomization, overall survival was similar in the two study groups. (Funded by the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00430365.).

Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone is active and well tolerated in bortezomib and lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma: Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome 2009-02.

The combination of pomalidomide and dexamethasone can be safely administered to patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and has significant efficacy, although the optimal regimen remains to be determined. Patients with MM whose disease progressed after multiple lines of therapy have limited treatment options. We designed a multicenter, phase 2 randomized study assessing two different dose regimens of pomalidomide and dexamethasone in advanced MM. Treatment response was assessed centrally. Pomalidomide (4 mg) was given orally on days 1 to 21 (arm 21/28) or continuously (arm 28/28) over a 28-day cycle, plus dexamethasone given weekly. Eighty-four patients (43, arm 21/28 and 41, arm 28/28) were randomized. The median number of prior lines was 5. Overall response rate was 35% (arm 21/28) and 34% (arm 28/28), independent of the number of prior lines and level of refractoriness. Median duration of response, time to disease progression, and progression-free survival was 7.3, 5.4, and 4.6 months, respectively, which was similar across cohorts. At 23 months follow-up, median overall survival was 14.9 months, with 44% of the patients alive at 18 months. Toxicity consisted primarily of myelosuppression, which was manageable. The efficacy and safety data presented here, along with data from other phase 2 trials, suggest that pomalidomide 4 mg per day on days 1 to 21 of 28 with dexamethasone should be investigated in future trials. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (No. NCT01053949).

Age is a prognostic factor even among patients with multiple myeloma younger than 66 years treated with high-dose melphalan: the IFM experience on 2316 patients.

Age is a strong prognostic factor in multiple myeloma. The overall survival is shorter in patients older than 66 years, and even shorter in those older than 75 years. Whether age is also a prognostic parameter in patients younger than 66 years treated homogeneously with intensive approaches is unknown. To address this issue, we retrospectively analyzed a series of 2316 patients treated homogeneously with 3-4 cycles of induction chemotherapy followed by a high-dose melphalan course, without any consolidation or maintenance. We show that patients older than 60 years have a statistically significant shorter overall survival. The analysis of prognostic parameters did not show a higher incidence of high-risk cytogenetics, but a higher incidence of International Staging System (ISS) stages 2 and 3, mainly due to higher ß2-microglobulin levels. This study is the first to demonstrate the impact of age in the outcome of 'young' patients with multiple myeloma, and suggests that this parameter should be included in the stratification factors for future prospective clinical trials.

Bortezomib plus dexamethasone versus reduced-dose bortezomib, thalidomide plus dexamethasone as induction treatment before autologous stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

The Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome conducted a randomized trial to compare bortezomib-dexamethasone (VD) as induction before high-dose therapy (HDT) and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) to a combination consisting of reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide plus dexamethasone (vtD) in patients with multiple myeloma. Overall, a total of 199 patients were centrally randomly assigned to receive VD or vtD. After 4 cycles, the complete response (CR) rate was the same in both groups (13% in the vtD arm, 12% in the VD arm, P = .74). However, the CR plus very good partial response (VGPR) rate was significantly higher in the vtD arm (49% vs 36%, P = .05). After ASCT, the CR plus VGPR rate was significantly higher in the vtD arm (74% vs 58%, P = .02). The reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide translated into a reduced incidence of peripheral neuropathy (PN): grade ≥ 2 PN were reported in 34% in the VD arm versus 14% in the vtD arm (P = .001). vtD, including reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide, yields higher VGPR rates compared with VD and can be considered a new effective triplet combination before HDT/ASCT.

Achievement of VGPR to induction therapy is an important prognostic factor for longer PFS in the IFM 2005-01 trial.

In the 2005-01 trial, we have demonstrated that bortezomib-dexamethasone as induction therapy before autologous stem cell transplantation was superior to vincristine-adriamycin-dexamethasone. We conducted a post-hoc analysis to assess the prognostic impact of initial characteristics as well as response to therapy in patients enrolled in this study. Multivariate analysis showed that ISS stages 2 and 3 and achievement of response less than very good partial response (VGPR) both after induction therapy and after autologous stem cell transplantation were adverse prognostic factors for progression-free survival, the most important one being achievement of response less than VGPR after induction. Progression-free survival was significantly improved with bortezomib-dexamethasone induction therapy in patients with poor-risk cytogenetics and ISS stages 2 and 3 compared with vincristine-adriamycin-dexamethasone. In these 2 groups of patients, achievement of at least VGPR after induction was of major importance. This study is registered with EudraCT (https://eudract.ema.europa.eu; EUDRACT 2005-000537-38) and http://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00200681).

Safety of thalidomide in newly diagnosed elderly myeloma patients: a meta-analysis of data from individual patients in six randomized trials.

Treatment with melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide improves the outcome of patients with multiple myeloma and is now considered a standard of care for patients not eligible for transplantation. However, this treatment is a major source of morbidity. A meta-analysis of data from individual patients (n=1680) in six randomized trials was performed, comparing the effects of melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide versus melphalan-prednisone. The main objective was to estimate the risk of serious adverse events and their impact on outcome. The primary endpoints were the 2-year cumulative incidence of grade 3-4 hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities. At least 75% of the grade 3-4 toxicities occurred during the first 6 months of treatment in both treatment groups. The cumulative incidence of grade 3-4 hematologic toxicities was higher in the melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide group than in the melphalan-prednisone group (28% versus 22%; HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.05-1.66) as was the cumulative incidence of non-hematologic toxicities (39% versus 17%, HR 2.78, 95% CI 2.21-3.50). Grade 3-4 non-hematologic toxicities were significantly increased in patients with poor Performance Status. Occurrence of grade 3-4 non-hematologic toxicities had a negative impact on both progression-free survival (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.07-1.45) and overall survival, (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.03-1.47). Besides toxicities, progression-free and overall survival were also negatively affected by advanced International Staging System stage, high creatinine levels and poor Performance Status. Age had a negative impact on survival as well. Although melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide improved outcome, it increased toxicities, especially non-hematologic ones. Serious non-hematologic toxicities, older age, poor Performance Status, and high creatinine levels negatively affected survival.

Bortezomib and high-dose melphalan as conditioning regimen before autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with de novo multiple myeloma: a phase 2 study of the Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome (IFM).

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is recommended for younger patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Achieving complete response (CR) or at least very good partial response (VGPR) is a major prognostic factor for survival with 20% to 30% of patients achieving CR after ASCT. Bortezomib has shown synergistic effects with melphalan and no prolonged hematologic toxicity. In this Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome (IFM) phase 2 study, 54 untreated patients were enrolled between July and December 2007 to receive bortezomib (1 mg/m(2) x 4) and melphalan (200 mg/m(2)) as conditioning regimen (Bor-HDM). Overall, 70% of patients achieved at least VGPR, including 17 patients with CR (32%) after ASCT. No toxic deaths were observed. Bortezomib did not increase hematologic toxicity. Only 1 grade 3 to 4 peripheral neuropathy was reported. A matched control analysis was conducted comparing our cohort with patients from the IFM 2005-01 trial (HDM alone). Patients were matched for response to induction therapy and type of induction: CR was higher in the Bor-HDM group (35% vs 11%; P = .001), regardless of induction therapy. These results suggest that Bor-HDM is a safe and promising conditioning regimen. Randomized studies are needed to assess whether this conditioning regimen is superior to HDM alone. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00642395.

Low-dose vs. high-dose thalidomide for advanced multiple myeloma: a prospective trial from the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome.

This multicentre prospective randomised trial compared the efficacy and safety of two doses of thalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma. The study was designed to test the non-inferior efficacy and to confirm the better tolerability of low-dose thalidomide as compared to a higher dose. Four hundred patients were randomly assigned to receive either 100 or 400 mg/day of thalidomide. Dexamethasone treatment was added in both arms for patients with stable disease or treatment failure at 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was 1-year overall survival (OS). Thalidomide 100 mg/day was better tolerated than 400 mg/day with less high-grade somnolence, constipation, nausea/vomiting and peripheral neuropathy (P < 0.001, P = 0.007, P = 0.03 and P = 0.007, respectively). In the per-protocol population (PP), the estimated 1-year OS rates were of 74.5% (n = 149) and 67.3% (n = 156) in the 400 and 100 groups, respectively. The upper limit of the difference between these rates was of 15.6% higher than the non-inferiority acceptable limit of 12.75%, and the hypothesis of non-inferiority of 100 could not be established (P = 0.14). On the other hand, when intent-to-treat (ITT) population was analysed, the non-inferiority was demonstrated because the 1-year OS rates were of 72.8% (n = 195) and 68.8% (n = 205) in the same groups, leading to an upper limit of the difference of 11.49% lower than the non-inferiority acceptable limit. In addition, in patients alive 12 weeks postrandomisation and those who received thalidomide plus dexamethasone, there were no significant differences in response rates, time to progression, progression-free survival and OS between the two groups. Collectively, low-dose thalidomide 100 mg/day has significant activity in advanced myeloma with an improved safety profile and can be a good salvage therapy in combination with dexamethasone.