Emerging combination treatment strategies containing novel agents in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

Treatment strategies for multiple myeloma have changed substantially over the past 10 years following the introduction of bortezomib and the immunomodulatory drugs thalidomide and lenalidomide. In the front-line setting, combination regimens incorporating these novel agents are demonstrating substantial activity, which is translating into improved outcomes compared with previous standards of care. Response rates and depth of response that were previously only seen with high-dose therapy plus stem-cell transplantation (HDT–SCT) can now be achieved with new induction regimens utilizing these novel agents. This has raised the need for trials that will determine the clinical benefit of early SCT in patients that have already achieved a high quality of response. Here, we review the improvements in response and outcome that are seen with these novel-agent regimens, both as induction therapy prior to HDT–SCT and in non-transplant patients, and highlight the latest data from key studies of various novel combinations, including regimens featuring bortezomib plus thalidomide or lenalidomide. We also review data on response and outcomes in patients with poor prognostic characteristics that indicate that the adverse impact typically seen with these factors may be overcome using novel-agent therapy.     

Current status of new drugs for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma

Multiple myeloma, a malignant disorder of plasma cells, is the second most common haematological malignancy. Although treatable, multiple myeloma remains incurable in virtually all cases, with a median survival of 3-4 years. Fortunately for patients with this disease, traditional treatment paradigms have been challenged with the emergence of a number of new therapies entering clinical practice over the last 6 years. In this review, we focus on the use of thalidomide (Thalidomide Pharmion; Boulder, CO, USA), lenalidomide (Revlimid; Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, USA) and bortezomib (Velcade; Janssen Pharmaceutica N.V., Belgium) in the treatment of myeloma. We present the current clinical experience with respect to efficacy and toxicity of these promising new agents and how the incorporation of these drugs with traditional therapies may improve the outcome for patients with multiple myeloma.     

Clinical impact of chromosomal aberrations in multiple myeloma

Chromosomal aberrations are frequently found in multiple myeloma cells and play a major role in patient outcome and management of the disease. The most important chromosomal aberrations associated with poor outcome are del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16) and t(14;20). Others that may be associated with adverse prognosis include amp(1)(q21), del(1p32), del(13), del(8p21) and hypodiploidy. Many chromosomal aberrations have no or uncertain impact; for example, t(11;14), t(8;14) and hyperdiploidy. Attempts have been made to overcome the negative prognostic impact of chromosomal aberrations using autologous or allogeneic transplantation or new immunomodulatory drugs such as thalidomide, lenalidomide and the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib, but the results are controversial. Data suggest that allogeneic transplantation and treatment with bortezomib or lenalidomide may help to overcome the negative effect of del(13) on prognosis, whereas bortezomib may have some influence on reducing the impact of del(17p), t(4;14) and t(14;16). Chromosome analysis should always be performed at diagnosis of multiple myeloma to improve the prediction of outcome and to aid treatment decision-making.     

Bortezomib and thalidomide, a steroid free regimen in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma

Despite their efficacy in myeloma, corticosteroids have acute and chronic toxicities. Newer agents with significant anti-myeloma activity permit the development of steroid-free regimens. We designed a Phase II clinical trial to study the toxicity and efficacy of a steroid-free combination of bortezomib and thalidomide as a first-line treatment in patients with symptomatic myeloma. Patients received bortezomib 1·3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8 and 11 every 21 d and thalidomide 150 mg/d for a maximum of eight cycles. Amongst 27 evaluable patients, the overall response was 81·5% with 25·8% near complete response or greater. The response rate was comparable to most other two drug combinations for upfront therapy but lower than that obtained with the use of three drugs. The most common grade 3 toxicities were peripheral neuropathy (22%), pneumonia (15%), fatigue (7%) and anaemia (7%). Peripheral neuropathy completely resolved in 80% of the patients upon completion of therapy, but not in the remaining 20% of patients. No venous thromboembolic events were observed even in the absence of prophylactic anticoagulation. The median progression-free survival was 16·8 months (95% confidence interval 8·7-21·6 months). Median overall survival has not yet been reached at a median follow up of 39 months. The 3-year overall survival was 74%. This study demonstrates: (i) the efficacy of a steroid-free regimen; (ii) mostly reversible treatment-related peripheral neuropathy; and (iii) the absence of venous thrombotic events.     

�෢�Թ��������Ʋ��Խ�չ

多发性骨髓瘤仍是一种不可治愈的血液肿瘤,近10年的治疗突破很大程度上依赖新药的研发,主要包括蛋白酶体抑制剂硼替佐米、免疫调节剂如来那度胺和沙利度胺等。力求达到完全缓解(CR)是目前的治疗目标,因为CR意味着无进展生存期(PFS)甚至总生存期(OS)的延长。以新药为基础的不同诱导方案显著提高一线治疗缓解率。缓解后或移植后进行巩固和维持治疗显著延长PFS。文章主要对包含新药的诱导方案进行总结,并简要讨论难治复发骨髓瘤患者的治疗。     

Impact of prior therapies on the relative efficacy of bortezomib compared with dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

This subgroup analysis of the phase III APEX (Assessment of Proteasome Inhibition for Extending Remissions) trial examined whether prior exposure to specific therapies affected the relative efficacy of bortezomib versus dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory myeloma. Time to progression and overall survival were superior with bortezomib in all subgroups, with no evidence of interaction between any prior therapies and assignment to study therapy. Patients with prior thalidomide exposure had worse outcomes overall, but neither prior thalidomide nor prior autologous stem cell transplantation affected the relative efficacy of bortezomib versus dexamethasone. These results confirm the superiority of bortezomib over dexamethasone, regardless of prior exposure to specific therapies (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00048230).     

The roles of consolidation and maintenance therapy with novel agents after autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma

Novel agents including immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors incorporated into induction regimens and subsequently followed by autologous stem cell transplantation in cases of multiple myeloma have resulted in enhancement of response rate and its depth. Maintaining or even improving the response is an important treatment goal. Most clinical trials have revealed increased progression‐free survival after consolidation and maintenance therapy. Some of them have also shown prolongation of overall survival. However, continuous therapy may be associated with significant side effects and costs, and therefore remains controversial. Treatment decisions should be individualized and based upon projected benefits and risks.     

A comparison of lenalidomide/dexamethasone versus cyclophosphamide/lenalidomide/dexamethasone versus cyclophosphamide/bortezomib/dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

Novel agents are considered standard components of induction therapy for newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma. We retrospectively compared the results of three consecutive phase 2 clinical trials; RD (lenalidomide/dexamethasone, n = 34), CRD (cyclophosphamide/lenalidomide/dexamethasone, n = 53) and CyBorD (cyclophosphamide/bortezomib/dexamethasone, n = 63) (N = 150). Response rates after four cycles of treatment were: ≥near complete response (nCR), 12% vs. 2% vs. 41%, P < 0·0001 and very good partial response or better, 35% vs. 30% vs. 65%, P = 0·0003, respectively. With all cycles of therapy considered, ≥nCR was 35%, 15% and 41%, P = 0·006. However, there is no evidence that one regimen produced superior progression‐free survival (PFS) (median: 3·2 vs. 2·3 vs. 2·7 years, P = 0·11) or overall survival (3‐year: 88% vs. 79% vs. 88%, P = 0·23). Transplantation did not impact PFS (median: 2·7 vs. 2·3 years, P = 0·41) but was associated with improved OS (3‐year: 93% vs. 75%, P ≤ 0·001). High genetic risk patients (n = 40) had earlier relapse despite lenalidomide or bortezomib (median: 2·1 vs. 2·7 years, P = 0·45). Grade 3/4 toxicities were least with CyBorD while CRD had most toxicity. In conclusion, CyBorD demonstrated superior responses and less frequent serious toxicity but more neuropathy when compared to RD and CRD. Importantly, 80% of patients treated with modern therapeutic approaches are alive at 4 years.     

Multiple myeloma: chemotherapy or transplantation in the era of new drugs

Objective: To review the current results of studies incorporating novel agents in multiple myeloma (MM) and discuss the role of autologous stem‐cell transplantation (ASCT) in the era of new active drugs for the treatment of this disease. The outlook for patients with symptomatic MM is changing with the introduction of bortezomib, thalidomide, and lenalidomide into the repertoire of available chemotherapeutic agents. Compared with standard chemotherapy, a survival benefit has been reported for the first time in 30 yrs. Methods: Articles published in English between 1969 and 2008 were identified by searching PubMed for ‘myeloma’, ‘diagnosis’, ‘thalidomide’, ‘bortezomib’, ‘lenalidomide’, ‘dexamethasone’, ‘prednisone’, ‘doxorubicin’, ‘cyclophosphamide’, ‘melphalan’, ‘combination chemotherapy’, and ‘autologous transplantation’. Results: In randomized studies, bortezomib, thalidomide, and lenalidomide have each been combined with dexamethasone, alkylating agents, or doxorubicin, and such combinations resulted in significant improvement in progression‐free survival. Conclusions: The incorporation of new drugs as induction therapy along with ASCT appears to produce very good partial response rates, slightly superior to those achieved by conventional chemotherapy with new drugs. How to best optimize induction, consolidation, and maintenance therapy and how to best select and prepare patients for ASCT are still to be determined. Randomized trials are needed to directly compare the current best chemotherapeutic approach with best ASCT strategies and to guide clinical practice for patients with MM.     

Combined immune score predicts the prognosis of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients in the bortezomib-based therapy era

To investigate the effect of a combined immune score including the lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) and uninvolved immunoglobulin (u-Ig) levels on the prognosis of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients treated with bortezomib.Clinical data of 201 NDMM patients were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with LMR ≥ 3.6 and LMR < 3.6 were scored 0 and 1, respectively. Patients with preserved u-Ig levels, suppression of 1 u-Ig, and suppression of at least 2 u-Igs were scored 0, 1, and 2, respectively. The immune score, established from these individual scores, was used to separate patients into good (0–1 points), intermediate (2 points), and poor (3 points) risk groups. The baseline data, objective remission rate (ORR), whether receive maintenance treatment regularly and overall survival of patients before treatment were analyzed.The ORR of the good-risk group was significantly higher than that of the intermediate-risk group (75.6% vs 57.7%, P = .044) and the poor-risk group (75.6% vs 48.2%, P = .007). The multivariate analysis results showed that age ≥ 65 years, International Staging System stage III, platelet count ≤ 100 × 109/L, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) > 250 U/L, serum calcium > 2.75 mmol/L, no receipt of regular maintenance treatment, LMR < 3.6, suppressed u-Igs = 1, suppressed u-Igs ≥ 2, intermediate-risk group and poor-risk group were independent predictors of poor overall survival.In the bortezomib era, the LMR, u-Ig levels, and the immune score play an important role in the prognosis of NDMM patients. Among them, the immune score showed the strongest prognostic value, and it could be a beneficial supplement for the early identification of high-risk patients.     

Role of autologous stem-cell transplantation in multiple myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) is one of the diseases in which the impact of dose intensity has been demonstrated. Consequently, in 2005 MM was the first disease for which autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) was indicated in Europe and the US. However, ASCT is not curative, and most patients relapse in a median of 3 years. The introduction of novel agents such as thalidomide, bortezomib (Velcade) or lenalidomide (Revlimid) was logical to try to improve the high-dose strategy, and promising results have been reported. This article will focus on the current results of ASCT and will discuss the main research area to try to improve this strategy.     

Three-step high-dose sequential chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: High-dose chemotherapy (HDT) with autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell (PBPC) transplant has been increasingly used for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) in recent years. Presently available results suggest an improvement in the complete remission rate and survival as compared to conventional chemotherapy. However, there is no plateau in the survival curves, and experiments with new treatment schedules and conditioning regimens are warranted. DESIGN AND METHODS: In a non-randomised controlled trial, 20 patients underwent three-step HDT following conventional vincristine/doxorubicin/dexamethasone (VAD)-based induction. In the intensification phase patients received high-dose cyclophosphamide (HD-CY), high-dose etoposide (HD-VP), and mitoxantrone (NOV) plus melphalan (L-PAM) with haemopoietic rescue. Maintenance treatment with interferon was given until relapse. Actuarial overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) curves were plotted according to the method of Kaplan and Meier. In five of the eight patients achieving complete remission (CR), the molecular disease was monitored by polymerase chain reaction technique (PCR). RESULTS: Overall 18/20 (90%) patients responded, with a CR rate of 40%. After an average follow-up of 40 months, median EFS and OS are 25.5 and 44.6 months, respectively. Monoclonal cells were detectable in the post-treatment bone marrow and in the aphereses of the five CR patients monitored by PCR. CONCLUSION: The present three-step HDT regimen, including conditioning with mitoxantrone and melphalan, proved to be feasible and safe. Our results are in agreement with the hypothesis that HDT results in an increased remission rate and in prolonged survival in newly diagnosed MM, but a cure is unlikely.     

自体外周造血干细胞移植治疗21例多发性骨髓瘤的临床疗效及预后因素评价

目的:评价自体外周造血干细胞移植(APBSCT)治疗21例多发性骨髓瘤(MM)患者的临床疗效以及影响预后的相关因素.方法:21例MM患者中有2例患者复发后行2次APBSCT,因此共行APBSCT 23例次.5例患者在诱导治疗时采用硼替佐米(万坷)联合方案,其他患者多数采用长春新碱、阿霉素加地塞米松(VAD)方案诱导治疗...     

Short progression-free survival predicts for poor overall survival in older patients with multiple myeloma treated upfront with novel agent-based therapy

Objectives: To assess the importance of the quality of response and of early relapse in unselected elderly patients with myeloma treated upfront with novel agents. Methods: We analyzed 135 unselected transplant‐ineligible patients older than 65 yr who were treated upfront with novel agent‐based regimens in a single center. Results: On intent to treat, 81% of patients achieved a response (28% sCR/CR, 23% VGPR, and 30% PR). Median progression‐free survival (PFS) for patients who achieved sCR/CR was 31 vs. 20 months for VGPR and 23 months for PR (P = 0.048). Median overall survival (OS) for patients with sCR/CR was 62 months, 53 months for VGPR and 38 months for patients with PR (P = 0.028). Early relapse (PFS < 12 months) was more common in patients with PR (39% vs. 21% for VGPR vs. 3% for sCR/CR). Patients who relapsed or progressed <12 months from initiation of treatment had a median OS of 15.4 months compared with 53 months (P < 0.001) for patients who had a PFS > 12 months despite the fact that after relapse or progression most patients were treated again with novel agents. In multivariate analysis, short PFS was the most significant adverse prognostic factor affecting OS, associated with a 7.25‐fold (P < 0.0001) increase in the risk of death. Conclusion: In newly diagnosed patients over 65 yr, treated upfront with novel agents achievement of CR and a PFS ≥12 months is associated with improved outcome. Patients who fail to respond or experience early relapse after primary therapy with novel agent‐based regimens should be encouraged to participate in clinical trials of novel agents and combinations.