Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Bortezomib Re-Treatment in Patients With Multiple Myeloma

IntroductionBortezomib is administered for a finite course; thus, patients might remain sensitive to bortezomib-based therapy at relapse. We report a meta-analysis of bortezomib-based retreatment in relapsed/refractory myeloma.Patients and MethodsA systematic literature review identified studies of bortezomib-based retreatment in relapsed/refractory myeloma. Proportions of bortezomib-refractory patients and additional prognostic factors were extracted and used in weighted stratified analyses of TTP and OS. Random-effect pooled estimates were calculated for overall response rate (ORR) and rates of common AEs.ResultsTwenty-three studies (n = 1051 patients) were identified. Bortezomib was administered intravenously in all studies. Across studies in which data were available, pooled, weighted average ORR was 39.1% (95% confidence interval, 30.8%-47.4%), and pooled, weighted average median TTP and OS were 7.5 and 16.6 months, respectively. Patients with fewer previous therapies (≤ 4) and relapsed (not refractory) patients achieved higher ORRs, of 43.4% and 57.2%, respectively. Random-effects meta-regression analysis confirmed that relapsed patients were associated with a higher ORR by 28 to 41 percentage points versus refractory patients. In relapsed patients, median TTP and OS were 8.5 and 19.7 months, respectively. Common Grade 3/4 AEs included thrombocytopenia (35%), neutropenia (15%), anemia (14%), pneumonia (10%), and peripheral neuropathy (3%).ConclusionBased on these findings, bortezomib retreatment is well tolerated and appears efficacious in relapsed patients. In an era of new and emerging treatment options for relapsed and/or refractory myeloma, these data indicate that bortezomib retreatment might be a highly effective option in previously treated patients.     

30例自体外周造血干细胞移植治疗多发性骨髓瘤的疗效及预后因素评价

目的:对30例多发性骨髓瘤（multiple myeloma,MM）患者经自体外周造血干细胞移植（autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation ,APBSCT）治疗后的临床疗效进行评估,并分析可能影响预后的因素。方法:30例MM患者有2 例复发行2 次APBSCT,因此共计移植32例次。移植前予常规联合化疗（11例含万珂）,化疗联合G-CSF 动员APBSC ,选择以马法兰为基础的预处理方案,d0 天回输。结果:动员后患者采集的单个核细胞（MNC）中位数为6.41× 108/kg,CD34+细胞4.75× 106/kg。APBSCT后中位中性粒细胞和血小板重建时间分别为9.5 天和11天。APBSCT后CR和VGPR 率分别为37.5% 和34.4% ,中位生存期（overallsurvival ,OS）为67.27个月,中位无进展生存期（progression-freesurvival ,PFS）为29.77个月,其中CR组、PR组中位PFS 分别为29个月、20个月,VGPR 组中位PFS 未达到,CR+VGPR组与PR组PFS 比较P=0.025。万珂组和非万珂组CR率分别为63.6% 和23.8%（P=0.034）,万珂组中位OS及PFS 均未达到,非万珂组中位PFS 为22个月（P=0.045）。 结论:硼替佐米诱导序贯APBSCT可获得更长的无病生存。APBSCT作为MM诱导缓解后的强化治疗,缓解率高,且移植后获得VGPR 以上反应的患者PFS 获益。      

Vorinostat Plus Bortezomib for the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Case Series Illustrating Utility in Clinical Practice

IntroductionIncreasing numbers of patients are presenting with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM) following treatment with bortezomib. Therefore, there is a need for effective and well-tolerated treatment strategies after failure of bortezomib-based regimens. Vorinostat, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, has demonstrated antiproliferative and proapoptotic activity alone and in combination with bortezomib in preclinical models of MM. Preliminary results from ongoing phase I trials have demonstrated the clinical activity of vorinostat in combination with bortezomib in patients with MM. This case series reports our experience of combined vorinostat and bortezomib in 6 patients with relapsed/refractory MM after previous bortezomib.Materials and MethodsPatients received oral vorinostat 300 mg or 400 mg once daily (days 1-14) and bortezomib 1.3 mg/m² on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 in a 21-day cycle.ResultsAll patients derived clinical benefit from combined vorinostat and bortezomib, with objective response observed in 5 of the 6 patients (≥ minimal response), including 1 very good partial response; stable disease was observed in the remaining patient. Patients remained on therapy until disease progression. Combined vorinostat and bortezomib therapy was well tolerated: grade 2 nausea and diarrhea were the only adverse events reported. No patients discontinued therapy because of toxicity, and no dose adjustments were required for either agent.ConclusionThese results suggest that combined vorinostat and bortezomib therapy is effective in patients with relapsed/refractory MM after failure of previous bortezomib-based regimens and support further evaluation of this combination in randomized trials.     

Serum C-reactive protein at diagnosis and response to therapy is the most powerful factor predicting outcome of multiple myeloma treated with thalidomide/ anthracycline-based therapy

BackgroundFew studies have focused on factors affecting outcome in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) treated with thalidomide-based therapy. We investigated factors affecting response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in patients with MM treated with the thalidomide, dexamethasone, and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (ThaDD) regimen with the aim to select patients benefiting more from this therapy.Patients and MethodsSixty-six patients with MM were treated first line with the ThaDD regimen. We analyzed demographics and disease-related characteristics to search for factors affecting response (≥ very good partial remission [VGPR] vs. < VGPR], PFS, and OS.ResultsOverall, 45 patients (68%) showed response ≥ VGPR; median TTP and OS were 23.5 months and 35.5 months, respectively. Multivariate analysis selected only serum C-reactive protein (sCRP) as a predictive factor for response (P < .0001). By multivariate analysis, normal sCRP level (P = .001) and response to treatment ≥ VGPR (P = .007) were found to be associated with longer PFS. The factors that remained significantly associated with a longer OS when assessed by multivariate analysis were normal sCRP level (P = .005) and response to therapy ≥ VGPR (P = .019).ConclusionSerum C-reactive protein before therapy and response after therapy are the only factors useful in identifying patients benefiting from anthracycline/thalidomide—based therapy.     

Single fraction radiotherapy is efficacious: a further analysis of the Dutch Bone Metastasis Study controlling for the influence of retreatment

PURPOSE: The Dutch Bone Metastasis Study on the effect on painful bone metastases of 8 Gy single fraction (SF) vs. 24 Gy in multiple fractions (MF) showed 24% retreatment after SF vs. 6% after MF (p < 0.001). The purpose of the present study was to evaluate factors influencing retreatment and its effect on response. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The database on all randomized patients was reanalyzed with separately calculated responses to initial treatment and retreatment. RESULTS: Response to initial treatment was 71% after SF vs. 73% after MF (p = 0.84). Retreatment raised response to 75% for SF; MF remained unaltered (p = 0.54). The response status after initial treatment did not predict occurrence of retreatment: 35% SF vs. 8% MF nonresponders and 22% SF vs. 10% MF patients with progressive pain were retreated. Logistic regression analyses showed the randomization arm and the pain score before retreatment to significantly predict retreatment (p < 0.001). Retreatment for nonresponders was successful in 66% SF vs. 33% MF patients (p = 0.13). Retreatment for progression was successful in 70% SF vs. 57% MF patients (p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: With or without the effect of retreatment, SF and MF radiotherapy provided equal palliation for painful bone metastases. Irrespective of response to initial treatment, physicians were more willing to retreat after a single fraction. Overall, retreatment was effective in 63% of retreated patients.     

Weekly Bortezomib,Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin,and Dexamethasone Is a Safe and Effective Therapy for Elderly Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

BackgroundThe synergic, additive effect of bortezomib and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) has never been tested in an elderly group of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM).Patients and Methods:In this study, 25 patients with a median age of 75 years were treated with bortezomib at usual doses of 1.3 mg/m² every 21 days. After 2 cycles, bortezomib was given intravenously (I.V.) weekly every 32 days. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 30 mg/m² I.V. was given on day 4 for 2 cycles and then was given on day 8. Dexamethasone 40 mg I.V. was given on days 1-4 for 2 cycles and then 20 mg weekly.Results:Bortezomib/PLD/dexamethasone therapy resulted in 20 of 25 objective responses for an overall response rate of 80% (complete remission + very good partial remission, 66%). Median overall survival was not reached. Median duration of response (progression-free survival) was 8 months. Eleven of 16 patients (68%) with ≥ VGPR still maintain a response at a median of 12 months versus 4 months for patients with < VGPR (PFS, overall survival; P = .0001). Grade 3/4 toxicities were mild in most of the patients.ConclusionBortezomib/PLD/dexamethasone combination is safe and effective in elderly patients with resistant-relapsing MM.     

Targeting complete response with upfront bortezomib consolidation versus observation after the achievement of complete response following autologous transplantation for multiple myeloma (TUBA study)

Complete response (CR) after treatment for multiple myeloma is associated with superior progression‐free survival (PFS). Multiple myeloma patients were prospectively recruited for induction treatment with bortezomib and dexamethasone (BD) followed by autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto‐HCT) between 2010 and 2012. If patients did not achieve CR after auto‐HCT, BD consolidation therapy was added to target CR. After the BD induction phase (n = 46), greater than or equal to CR was achieved in 4 patients (8%). After auto‐HCT (n = 34), greater than or equal to CR was achieved in 9 patients (20%) and very good partial response (VGPR) was achieved in 11 (24%). Of the 24 patients who received auto‐HCT and whose response was less than CR, 21 received BD consolidation therapy for a median of 4 courses. Finally, the maximum response with or without BD consolidation was greater than or equal to CR in 19 (41%), VGPR in 7 (15%), and PR in 6 (13%). Through BD consolidation, CR was achieved in 8 of 11 patients with post‐HCT VGPR and in 2 of 12 patients with post‐HCT PR. In total, 4 year PFS and overall survival were 43 and 80%, respectively. After adjusting for clinical factors, there was no difference in PFS between CR patients after auto‐HCT and BD consolidation, while patients with less than or equal to VGPR after consolidation had a significantly lower PFS. Patients with post‐HCT CR showed good PFS, and targeting CR through BD consolidation could improve the CR rate. It would be worthwhile to prospectively compare the efficacy of consolidation only for patients who failed to achieve CR to a universal consolidation strategy.     

Discontinuation of anti-PD-1 antibody therapy in the absence of disease progression or treatment limiting toxicity: clinical outcomes in advanced melanoma

BackgroundProgrammed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blocking monoclonal antibodies improve the overall survival of patients with advanced melanoma but the optimal duration of treatment has not been established.Patients and MethodsThis academic real-world cohort study investigated the outcome of 185 advanced melanoma patients who electively discontinued anti-PD-1 therapy with pembrolizumab (N = 167) or nivolumab (N = 18) in the absence of disease progression (PD) or treatment limiting toxicity (TLT) at 14 medical centres across Europe and Australia.ResultsMedian time on treatment was 12 months (range 0.7–43). The best objective tumour response at the time of treatment discontinuation was complete response (CR) in 117 (63%) patients, partial response (PR) in 44 (24%) patients and stable disease (SD) in 16 (9%) patients; 8 (4%) patients had no evaluable disease (NE). After a median follow-up of 18 months (range 0.7–48) after treatment discontinuation, 78% of patients remained free of progression. Median time to progression was 12 months (range 2–23). PD was less frequent in patients with CR (14%) compared with patients with PR (32%) and SD (50%). Six out of 19 (32%) patients who were retreated with an anti-PD-1 at the time of PD obtained a new antitumour response.ConclusionsIn this real-world cohort of advanced melanoma patients discontinuing anti-PD-1 therapy in the absence of TLT or PD, the duration of anti-PD-1 therapy was shorter when compared with clinical trials. In patients obtaining a CR, and being treated for >6 months, the risk of relapse after treatment discontinuation was low. Patients achieving a PR or SD as best tumour response were at higher risk for progression after discontinuing therapy, and defining optimal treatment duration in such patients deserves further study. Retreatment with an anti-PD-1 at the time of progression may lead to renewed antitumour activity in some patients.Clinical trial registrationNCT02673970 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02673970?cond=melanoma&cntry=BE&city=Jette&rank=3)     

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Rechallenge Safety and Efficacy in Stage IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients After Immune-Related Adverse Events

BackgroundDespite their anti-tumor efficacy, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are associated with a variety of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Grade ≥ 2 irAEs require ICI discontinuation. The decision to resume ICI treatment often remains challenging.MethodsWe retrospectively studied 1051 adult patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with ICIs at a single institution between January 2015 and December 2020, and identified 99 (9.4%) patients with grade≥2 irAEs necessitating treatment interruption. Forty patients underwent retreatment (rechallenged group), while 59 discontinued the treatment (discontinued group).ResultsBaseline characteristics of patients in the 2 groups were similar. Initial irAEs were less severe in the rechallenged group. After rechallenging, 24 of 40 (60%) patients had recurrence of the same or de-novo irAEs. Twenty (50%) developed second grade≥ 2 irAEs. No grade 4 irAE or irAE-related death occurred after rechallenging. Using multivariate analysis, no statistically significant differences in overall survival (OS) (HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.57-2.15, P = .77) or progression-free survival (PFS) (HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.45-1.71, P = .69) were noted between the 2 groups, while the best objective response prior to the initial irAEs was the only variable affecting OS and PFS.ConclusionsRechallenge was associated with a relative high risk of second grade≥ 2 irAEs. The risk was less if the initial irAEs were resolved. No differences were seen in survival outcomes of patients who had ICI rechallenge and those who did not. Permanent ICI discontinuation is an appropriate strategy after grade≥ 2 irAEs, especially severe irAEs.     

Once-weekly Subcutaneous Administration of Bortezomib in Patients with Multiple Myeloma

In patients with multiple myeloma (MM), once-weekly intravenous injection or twice-weekly subcutaneousinjection (SC) of bortezomib has been proven to offer non-inferior efficacy to standard twice-weekly intravenousadministration, with an improved safety profile. However, whether once-weekly SC bortezomib can further reducethe incidence rate of peripheral neuropathy (PN) and not compromise the efficacy remains to be investigated.25 patients of MM treated with once-weekly SC bortezomib were reviewed in this study. The median treatmentcycles were 4 (range, 2-9 cycles). Complete response (CR) rate was 52%, ≥very good partial response (VGPR)rate was 72%, and ≥partial response (PR) rate was 84%. 1-year and 2-year PFS rate was 63.0% and 34.3%,respectively, and 2-year OS rate was 100%. Any grade of PN was reported in 9 patients (36.0%), with 7 patients(28.0%) had grade 1 PN, and 2 patients (8.0%) had grade 2 PN. No patients reported grade 3/4 PN in this cohort.In conclusion, once-weekly subcutaneous administration of bortezomib offers excellent efficacy with a furtherimproved safety profile, especially with regard to PN. It needs to be validated in future prospective randomizedtrials.     

Real world outcomes with Bortezomib Thalidomide dexamethasone and Cyclophosphamide Bortezomib dexamethasone induction treatment for transplant eligible multiple myeloma patients in a Latin American country. A Retrospective Cohort Study from Grupo Argentino de Mieloma Múltiple

Data about treatment outcomes and toxicity in Latin America are scarce. There are differences with central countries based on access to healthcare system and socioeconomic status. Argentinean Society of Hematology recommends bortezomib-based triplets for induction treatment of transplant eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Most common options are CyBorD (cyclophosphamide, bortezomib and dexamethasone) and VTD (bortezomib, thalidomide and dexamethasone). Main goal of our retrospective, multicentric study was to compare very good partial response rate (VGPR) or better after induction treatment in a real-world setting in Argentina. Secondary objectives included comparison of complete response (CR) post-induction and after bone marrow transplantation, grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Three hundred twenty-two patients were included (median age at diagnosis: 57 years; 52% male; 28% had ISS3; 14% with high-risk cytogenetics; median follow up: 34 months). CyBorD was indicated in 74% and 26% received VTD. In VTD arm, 72.62% of patients achieved at least VGPR vs 53.36% receiving CyBorD (odds ratio, OR: 1.96 [95% confidence interval, CI: 1.08-3.57; P = .026] after adjusting by age, ISS [International Staging System], lactate dehydrogenase levels (LDH) and cytogenetic risk. Difference in VGPR was 19.26% (95% CI: 15-24). CR rate were 35.92% (VTD) vs 22.55% (CyBorD) (adjusted OR: 2.13 [95% CI: 1.12-4.05]). Difference in CR was 13.37% (95% CI: 9.6-17.53). Adverse events (AEs) were more common with VTD (69.05% vs 55.46% for CyBorD; P = .030), especially grade 3-4 neuropathy (P = .005) and thrombosis (P = .001). Thromboprophylaxis was inadequate in 20.24% of patients. Hematological AEs were more common with CyBorD, especially thrombocytopenia (P = .017). PFS and OS at 24 months were not different between treatments. In this real-world setting, VTD was associated with better CR and VGPR than CyBorD. Nevertheless, CyBorD continues to be the preferred induction regimen in Argentina, based on safety profile. Frontline autologous stem cell transplantation improves quality of responses, especially in countries with limited access to new drugs.     

伊沙佐米为基础的化疗方案治疗复发难治多发性骨髓瘤临床研究

目的:探讨以伊沙佐米为基础的化疗方案治疗复发难治多发性骨髓瘤（RRMM）的临床效果及相关不良反应。方法:收集2018年10月至2020年2月山东省菏泽市立医院、邹城市人民医院接受≥2个疗程以伊沙佐米为基础化疗方案治疗的RRMM患者21例,其中既往接受过含硼替佐米方案治疗患者15例,接受过含来那度胺方案治疗患者10例,接受过含以上两种药物方案治疗患者6例。采用伊沙佐米（4 mg,口服,第1、8、15天）联合其他药物（地塞米松、环磷酰胺或来那度胺）的两药或三药方案治疗。治疗第2、4个周期后评估其治疗效果及安全性。结果:21例RRMM患者治疗2个周期后评估总反应率（ORR）为38.09%（8/21）,其中部分缓解（PR）6例、非常好的部分缓解（VGPR）2例;4个周期后ORR为57.14%（12/21）,其中PR 7例、VGPR 4例、完全缓解（CR）1例。以伊沙佐米为基础的化疗方案3~4级不良反应发生率为23.81%（5/21）,血液学不良反应包括中性粒细胞减少、血小板降低及贫血,其他常见不良反应包括消化道反应、乏力、低钾血症等,周围神经不良反应均为2级及以下。结论:以伊沙佐米为基础的化疗方案对RRMM治疗有效,安全性较好。     

Comparative Efficacy of Teclistamab Versus Physician's Choice of Therapy in the Long-term Follow-up of APOLLO,POLLUX, CASTOR,and EQUULEUS Clinical Trials in Patients With Triple-class Exposed Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of teclistamab in patients with RRMM who received ≥3 prior lines of therapy and were triple-class exposed (TCE) are being evaluated in the single-arm, multicohort, phase I/II MajesTEC-1 trial (NCT04557098). We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of teclistamab versus physician's choice (PC) of therapy in TCE RRMM patients.MethodsIndividual patient-level data from MajesTEC-1 patients who received teclistamab (1.5 mg/kg weekly; clinical cutoff March 16, 2022) were included. An external control arm was created from patients in long-term follow-up of 4 clinical trials of daratumumab who were treated with PC therapy after discontinuation of trial treatments. In the primary analysis, inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for imbalances in 9 baseline covariates. A fully adjusted model included 5 additional prognostic factors. Outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) rate, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time to next treatment (TTNT).ResultsAfter adjustment, baseline characteristics were balanced between cohorts. In the primary analysis, outcomes were significantly improved with teclistamab versus PC: ORR (OR [95% CI] 4.81 [3.04-7.72]; P < .0001); ≥VGPR rate (OR, 12.07 [6.91-22.11]; P < .0001); OS (HR, 0.54 [0.40-0.73]; P < .0001); PFS (HR, 0.59 [0.46-0.78]; P = .0001); and TTNT (HR, 0.32 [0.24-0.42]; P < .0001). Results of the fully adjusted model were consistent with the primary analysis.ConclusionTeclistamab showed significantly improved effectiveness versus PC on all outcomes, highlighting its clinical benefit in patients with TCE RRMM and limited treatment options.     

Superiority of prolonged low-dose azanucleoside administration? Results of 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine retreatment in high-risk myelodysplasia patients

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment duration with decitabine (DAC) in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) remains a matter of debate. Although at least 2 consolidating courses after best response usually are performed, the response to treatment after disease recurrence has not been systematically studied to date. METHODS: In the current study, the authors report on 22 of 108 patients with MDS (20%) treated with low-dose DAC in 3 Phase II trials who received DAC as retreatment at the time of disease recurrence. RESULTS: According to the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) at the time of initial treatment, 5 of 22 patients (23%) had a score of intermediate-1 (Int-1), 4 patients (18%) had a score of Int-2, and 13 patients (59%) were scored as high-risk. Patients initially received a median of 6 courses of DAC (range, 2 courses-6 courses), which resulted in a complete remission (complete response [CR]) in 12 of the 22 patients (55%). Retreatment with DAC at the time of disease recurrence was initiated at a median of 11 months (range, 3 mos-27 mos) after the last course of initial treatment. With regard to DAC retreatment, patients received a median of 3 courses (range, 1 courses-6 courses), with 10 of 22 patients (45%) responding (1 with a CR and 2 with partial remissions [partial response (PR)]; all 3 patients achieved a CR at the time of initial treatment) and 7 patients demonstrating a hematologic improvement (HI) (at the time of initial treatment there were 2 CRs, 4 PRs, and 1 HI). Twelve of the 22 patients (55%) did not demonstrate any objective responses to retreatment, including 4 patients with primary resistance to the first course of retreatment. The median survival of all patients from the initiation of the first DAC course was 27.5 months (range, 15 mos-50+ mos). The median survival of 43 patients who also had achieved a response to the initial treatment with DAC but who received best supportive care (n = 33 patients) or induction chemotherapy (n = 10 patients) was 18 months (range, 5 mos-72 mos). Second responders to DAC retreatment were found less frequently in the IPSS high-risk group compared with nonresponders (40% vs. 83%). Age, French-American-British classification subtype, serum lactate dehydrogenase level at retreatment, and previous response to DAC were not found to strongly differ between the groups; however, the subgroups were too small to perform a statistical analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Retreatment with DAC was found to result in objective responses in 45% of previously DAC-responsive patients. However, the quality and duration of the second disease remissions were found to be inferior. Therefore, DAC-responsive patients might derive more clinical benefit from continuation of the initial treatment.     

Induction Treatment With Cyclophosphamide,Thalidomide, and Dexamethasone in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Phase II Study

Background:Thalidomide has alternative mechanisms of action; it can be combined with dexamethasone or alkylating agents for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM); however, the optimal doses and appropriate intervals of thalidomide continue to be debated.Patients and Methods:We assessed the clinical efficacy and toxicity of thalidomide in patients with newly diagnosed MM; 68 patients were treated with pulsed cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (CTD) chemotherapy for induction treatment.Results:After a median of 28 months' follow-up, the overall response rate was 79.4%, with a 42.6% complete response (CR) or very good partial response (VGPR). Patients with cytogenetically high-risk disease had poor CR/VGPR rates (27.3%) at a median of 11.5 months of time to progression (TTP) compared with patients with standard-risk disease who achieved CR/VGPR rates (50%) at a median of 20.3 months of TTP. The major adverse events included peripheral sensory neuropathy (14.3%), infection (10.2%), and thromboembolic complications (5.9%). Thirty-two patients who achieved more than a PR proceeded to peripheral blood stem cell collection with a median number of 5.0 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg collected.Conclusion:CTD resulted in a favorable response with tolerable toxicity in patients with MM and did not affect the yield of the stem cell collection.     

Cabozantinib in hepatocellular carcinoma: results of a phase 2 placebo-controlled randomized discontinuation study

BackgroundCabozantinib, an orally bioavailable inhibitor of tyrosine kinases including MET, AXL, and VEGF receptors, was assessed in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as part of a phase 2 randomized discontinuation trial with nine tumor-type cohorts.Patients and methodsEligible patients had Child-Pugh A liver function and ≤1 prior systemic anticancer regimen, completed ≥4 weeks before study entry. The cabozantinib starting dose was 100 mg daily. After an initial 12-week cabozantinib treatment period, patients with stable disease (SD) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.0 were randomized to cabozantinib or placebo. The primary endpoint of the lead-in stage was objective response rate (ORR) at week 12, and the primary endpoint of the randomized stage was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsAmong the 41 HCC patients enrolled, the week 12 ORR was 5%, with 2 patients achieving a confirmed partial response (PR). The week 12 disease control rate (PR or SD) was 66% (Asian subgroup: 73%). Of patients with ≥1 post-baseline scan, 78% had tumor regression, with no apparent relationship to prior sorafenib therapy. Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) response (>50% reduction from baseline) occurred in 9 of the 26 (35%) patients with elevated baseline AFP and ≥1 post-baseline measurement. Twenty-two patients with SD at week 12 were randomized. Median PFS after randomization was 2.5 months with cabozantinib and 1.4 months with placebo, although this difference was not statistically significant. Median PFS and overall survival from Day 1 in all patients were 5.2 and 11.5 months, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events, regardless of attribution, were diarrhea (20%), hand-foot syndrome (15%), and thrombocytopenia (15%). Dose reductions were utilized in 59% of patients.ConclusionsCabozantinib has clinical activity in HCC patients, including objective tumor responses, disease stabilization, and reductions in AFP. Adverse events were managed with dose reductions.Trial registration numberNCT00940225.     

A Clinical and Correlative Study of Elotuzumab,Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide,and Dexamethasone (Elo-KRd) for Lenalidomide Refractory Multiple Myeloma in First Relapse

IntroductionTreatment of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) in first relapse remains a challenge. This phase II study combined elotuzumab (Elo) with carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) for treatment of MM in first relapse with the aim of improving efficacy.MethodsEnrolled patients received Elo-KRd induction for 4 cycles, and Elo-lenalidomide maintenance until progression. The primary endpoint was VGPR or better (≥VGPR) postinduction. Secondary endpoints were MRD by flow cytometry, OS, PFS, and safety. Correlatives included characterization of the impact of Elo-KRd on NK and T cell subsets via flow cytometry. Target accrual of 40 patients was not met due to COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsOf 15 patients enrolled, 10 (67%) had high-risk features (del17p, t[4;14], t[14;16], 1q gain/amplification, plasma cell leukemia, extramedullary MM, or functional high risk), 12 (80%) were lenalidomide-refractory, and 5 (33.3%) bortezomib-refractory. Postinduction ≥VGPR was 7/15 (46.7%) and MRD-negative (10⁻⁵) rate 20%. Overall response during study was 80%, including ≥VGPR as best response of 53.3%. At median follow-up of 28.2 (range, 3.8 to 44.2) months, the median PFS was 11.5 months (95% CI 1.9, 18), and median OS not reached (95% CI 10.1, NA). No new safety concerns were reported. Elo-KRd treatment did not augment NK cell distribution or activity in blood or bone marrow. Effector CD4+ and CD8+ T cells significantly decreased postinduction, with concomitant acquisition of T central memory phenotype, particularly at a high rate in ≥VGPR group.ConclusionA short course of Elo-KRd induction followed by Elo-lenalidomide maintenance demonstrated activity in predominantly lenalidomide-refractory and / or high-risk MM. The results with this well-tolerated combination are comparable to other contemporary approved triplet combinations.     

Generic Lenalidomide Rivelime Versus Brand-name Revlimid® in the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Retrospective Single-center Experience on Efficacy,Safety and Survival Outcome

BackgroundThis study aimed to compare use of original brand-name lenalidomide (Revlimid®) vs. generic equivalent (Rivelime®) in terms of efficacy, safety and survival outcome in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM)Patients and MethodsA total of 184 patients RRMM (median age: 62 years, 60.9% were males) who received singlet, doublet or triplet lenalidomide-containing regimens including either Revlimid® (n=74) or Rivelime® (n=110) were included in this study. Treatment response was based on evaluation of objective response to treatment (ORR) including the sum of patients who achieved partial response (PR), very good partial responses (VGPR) or complete response (CR) to therapy. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety data were also recorded.ResultsRevlimid® and Rivelime® groups were similar in terms of ORR (54.1 vs. 60.0%), CR (22.5 vs. 28.8%), VGPR (55.0 vs. 50.0%) and PR (22.5 vs. 21.2%) rates. Median (SE) PFS time were similar between Rivelime® vs. Revlimid® treated patients who were in the 2^nd line (30.3(3.8) vs. 22.7(7.0) months, p=0.827) or 3^rd line of therapy (38.1(12.1) vs. 20.1(0.9) months, p=0.147) at lenalidomide initiation. Two groups also had similar OS rate (83.8 vs. 73.6%) and OS time (mean 122.3 vs. 123.5 months). Side effects were manageable in both groups.ConclusionIn conclusion, replacing Revlimid® with its generic version Rivelime® in singlet, doublet or triplet lenalidomide containing RRMM regimens seems not to compromise the efficacy of treatment, and to yield a similarly improved response rates and survival outcome and no additional toxic effects, enabling a long-term therapy.     

Primary Amyloidosis With Renal Involvement: Outcomes in 77 Consecutive Patients at a Single Center

BackgroundOutcomes in primary amyloid renal patients are of interest as the era of monoclonal antibody therapies begins.Patients and MethodsWe studied 77 consecutive primary amyloid renal patients (58% men) for renal progression (end stage renal disease [ESRD]), renal response (RR), and overall survival (OS).ResultsAt diagnosis median age was 63 (range, 35-81) years, estimated glomerular filtration rate 70 mL/min (range, 5-114), difference between involved and uninvolved free light chains 127 mg/L (range, 1-9957), ESRD 4%, renal stage 2 and 3 78%, and cardiac stage 2 and 3 56%. Ninety-six percent received bortezomib and 44% stem cell transplantation as well as bortezomib, 68% achieved complete or very good partial hematologic response (CR/VGPR), 34% had ESRD, and 39% RR. Median times to ESRD and RR were 18 (range, 3-81) and 12 (range, 2-30) months, respectively. Median OS was not reached in this cohort and was not reached from onset of ESRD. More than two-thirds of patients with ESRD also achieved CR/VGPR. In those without ESRD at diagnosis, baseline creatinine and absent RR predicted progression to ESRD in multivariate Cox regression analysis, whereas CR/VGPR predicted RR. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, cardiac stage and achievement of CR/VGPR predicted OS, enabling construction of a prognostic model.ConclusionAnti-plasma cell therapies provide a definite albeit limited benefit and new approaches to amyloid-related organ dysfunction are needed.     

PCD方案与VAD方案治疗多发性骨髓瘤的临床观察

  目的  探讨硼替佐米+环磷酰胺+地塞米松（PCD方案）和长春新碱+表阿霉素+地塞米松（VAD方案）治疗多发性骨髓瘤的临床疗效及不良反应。  方法  回顾天津市第一中心医院血液科2011年1月至2013年1月收治的多发性骨髓瘤患者41例,依治疗方案不同分为PCD组及VAD组,分析两组患者的疗效及不良反应。  结果  PCD组治疗后部分缓解及以上的有效率达42.9%,而VAD组仅15.0%,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）,在初治患者中反应良好的患者（CR和VGPR）PCD组为50.0%,VAD组7.7%,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）,两组患者在疱疹感染、血细胞减少及乏力腹胀等方面的不良反应无明显差异,但PCD组的神经毒性的发生率较VAD组高,差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。  结论  PCD方案治疗多发性骨髓瘤疗效优于VAD方案,特别是对于初治患者PCD方案能明显提高缓解率,但治疗过程中应注意硼替佐米的神经毒性,必要时应减量应用。