沙利度胺治疗难治性复发性多发性骨髓瘤的临床研究

目的：观察沙利度胺(Thalidomide，国内商品名：反应停)单药或联合地塞米松治疗多发性骨髓瘤(Multiple Myeloma，MM)的疗效及副作用。方法：单药组：男性13例，女性2例，中位年龄58岁。其中2例为初发的MM；1例为原发性浆细胞白血病(PCL)；12例为难治性MM，其中3例为自体外周血干细胞移植(AutoPBSCT)术后复发。反应停治疗起始剂量为100mg／d，根据患者耐受情况，逐渐加量，最高达800mg／d。联合组：男性20例，女性7例，中位年龄56岁。其中初发1例；1例为原发性PCL；25例为难治MM，其中2例为自体外周血干细胞移植(AutoPBSCT)术后复发。反应停剂量为400mg／d左右加用地塞米松40mg／天，第1～4天，第9～12天，第17～20天，1个月为一个疗程。结果：单药组42．9％(6／14)的患者对治疗有效，其中3例为完全缓解(CR)或接近完全缓解(Near-CR)，1例有明显治疗反应(Major response)，1例为部分缓解(PR)。12例难治性MM中4例有效(33．3％)；联合组有效率为57．7％(15／26)，其中4例为CR或Near-CR，2例有明显治疗反应，9例为PR。25例难治性MM中11例有效(44．0％)。两组间在总有效率及难治病例的有效率方面均无显著差异。两组患者均出现不同程度的便秘、皮疹等副作用，但均可耐受。结论：沙利度胺单药或联合地塞米松对难治性复发性MM均有效。     

Pomalidomide‐bortezomib‐dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: Japanese subset analysis of OPTIMISMM

In the phase 3 OPTIMISMM trial, pomalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (PVd) significantly improved the progression‐free survival (PFS) and the overall response rate (ORR) vs bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. All patients were previously treated with lenalidomide (70% refractory to lenalidomide) and had received one to three prior regimens. Here we report the first efficacy and safety analysis of PVd vs Vd in Japanese patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Seventeen patients enrolled in the OPTIMISMM trial in Japan. With a median follow‐up of 14.8 months, the median PFS was 17.6 months with PVd (n = 12) vs 4.4 months with Vd (n = 5), and the ORR was 100% vs 60.0%, respectively. The safety profile was as expected for PVd. Toxicities were managed with dose reductions and interruptions, and no patients discontinued PVd due to treatment‐emergent adverse events. These results are consistent with those in the overall OPTIMISMM patient population and confirm the clinical benefit of PVd in Japanese patients.     

Thalidomide and dexamethasone combination for refractory multiple?myeloma

Background:Thalidomide is effective in approximately 30%of patients with refractory multiple myeloma. Dexamethasone is active in25% of patients with disease resistant to alkylating agents. Weinvestigated the combination of thalidomide with dexamethasone as salvagetreatment for heavily pretreated patients with multiple myeloma, in order toassess its efficacy and toxicity. Patients and methods:Forty-four patients with refractory myelomawere treated with thalidomide, 200 mg p.o. daily at bedtime, with doseescalation to 400 mg after 14 days, and dexamethasone, which was administeredintermittently at a dose of 20 mg/m² p.o. daily for four days onday 1–4, 9–12, 17–20, followed by monthly dexamethasone forfour days. Patients' median age was 67 years. All patients wereresistant to standard chemotherapy, 77% were resistant todexamethasone-based regimens and 32% had previously received high-dosetherapy. Results:On an intention-to-treat basis twenty-four patients(55%) achieved a partial response with a median time to response of 1.3months. The thalidomide and dexamethasone combination was equally effectivein patients with or without prior resistance to dexamethasone-based regimensand in patients with or without prior high-dose therapy. Toxicities were mildor moderate and consisted primarily of constipation, morning somnolence,tremor, xerostomia and peripheral neuropathy. The median time to progressionfor responding patients is expected to exceed 10 months and the mediansurvival for all patients is 12.6 months. Conclusion:The combination of thalidomide with dexamethasoneappears active in patients with refractory multiple myeloma. If this activityis confirmed, further studies of this combination as second-line treatment forpatients resistant to conventional chemotherapy, and as primary treatment forpatients with active myeloma, should be considered.     

BD 和 VAD －T 方案治疗复发性／难治性多发性骨髓瘤的临床疗效比较

目的：分析 BD 方案和 VAD －T 方案治疗复发难治性多发性骨髓瘤患者的疗效及毒副反应。方法：将24例和38例患者分别用硼替佐米联合的 BD 方案治疗和沙利度胺联合的 VAD －T 方案治疗。每例患者接受同一方案治疗至少4个疗程。采用国际骨髓瘤工作组（IMWG）国际统一疗效标准评价疗效,并按 WHO肿瘤药物毒副反应分级标准观察毒副反应。结果：BD 方案组中24例患者中完全缓解（CR）6例,非常好地部分缓解（VGPR）11例,部分缓解（PR）5例,疾病稳定（SD）2例,总有效率（CR ＋VGPR ＋PR）91．7％;VAD －T方案组38例患者中 CR 1例,VGPR 3例,PR 18例,SD 11例,病情进展（PD）5例,总有效率57．9％,两组疗效比较差异有统计学意义（P ＜0．01）。两组患者主要毒副反应为周围神经病变、呕吐、便秘、感染、血小板减少、静脉血栓等,经对症处理或停药后缓解、减轻。BD 方案组患者毒副反应较 VAD －T 方案组患者重,但经对症处理后均可耐受。结论：与 VAD －T 方案相比,BD 方案治疗复发难治性 MM更有效,且毒副反应可耐受,BD方案的预后处理很重要。     

Bortezomib,thalidomide, and dexamethasone as induction therapy for patients with symptomatic multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND:

This single‐center retrospective study determined the efficacy of bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (BTD) as induction for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) who were eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT).

METHODS:

Patients with symptomatic MM who had received BTD induction before stem cell collection at Winship Cancer Institute were included. BTD induction comprised up to 8 3‐week cycles of bortezomib 1.3 mg/m² on Days 1, 4, 8, and 11; thalidomide 100 mg daily; and dexamethasone 40 mg on Days 1 through 4 and Days 9 through 12. Stem cell mobilization involved granulocyte‐colony–stimulating factor and/or cyclophosphamide. Response was assessed according to European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria.

RESULTS:

Review of medical records identified 44 eligible patients (34 patients who were treated in the front‐line setting and 10 patients who were treated for recurrent disease) who received a median of 4 BTD cycles. The overall response rate (ORR) was 91%, which included a greater than or equal to very good partial response (≥VGPR) rate of 57% (including 20% stringent complete responses/complete response [sCR/CR] rate). In front‐line patients, the ORR was 94%, which included a 56% ≥VGPR rate (24% sCR/CR). The median CD34‐positive stem cell collection was 10.67 × 10⁶/kg. The ORR after ASCT in 34 patients who were evaluable for response was 100%, including a 76% ≥VGPR rate (53% sCR/CR). Among all 44 patients, the median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 27.4 months. The median overall survival (OS) was not reached after a median follow‐up of 25 months, and the 2‐year OS rate was 82%. There were no significant differences in PFS (27.4 months vs 23.5 months) or in 2‐year survival (80% vs 90%) between patients who did and did not undergo ASCT, respectively. Twenty patients (45%) developed neuropathy, including 4 (9%) with grade 3 neuropathy episodes, and 1 patient developed deep vein thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS:

BTD was highly effective and well tolerated as induction for MM patients who were eligible for ASCT. Long‐term outcomes appeared to be similar with or without ASCT consolidation. Cancer 2010. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

Vorinostat in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

The addition of vorinostat to lenalidomide/dexamethasone represents a novel combination therapy in multiple myeloma (MM), informed by laboratory studies suggesting synergy. This was a phase I, multicenter, open-label, non-randomized, dose-escalating study in patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory MM. Clinical evaluation, electrocardiogram, laboratory studies and adverse events were obtained and assessed. The maximum-tolerated dose was not reached owing to a non-occurrence of two dose-limiting toxicities per six patients tested at any of the dosing levels. Patients tolerated the highest dose tested (Level 5) and this was considered the maximum administered dose: at 400 mg vorinostat on days 1–7 and 15–21, 25 mg lenalidomide on days 1–21 and 40 mg dexamethasone on days 1, 8, 15 and 22, per 28-day cycle. Drug-related adverse events were reported in 90% of patients serious adverse experiences were reported in 45% of the patients and 22% of all patients had adverse experiences considered, possibly related to study drug by the investigators. A confirmed partial response or better was reported for 14/30 patients (47%) evaluable for efficacy, including 31% of patients previously treated with lenalidomide. Vorinostat in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone proved tolerable with appropriate supportive care, with encouraging activity observed.     

Panobinostat: a novel pan-deacetylase inhibitor for the treatment of relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma

Outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) have improved significantly over the past decade. Despite these advances, MM remains incurable and an unmet medical need remains for patients who are relapsed and/or refractory. Panobinostat is a potent, oral pan-deacetylase inhibitor that elicits anti-myeloma activity through epigenetic modulation of gene expression and disruption of protein metabolism. Preclinical data demonstrated that panobinostat has synergistic effects on myeloma cells when combined with bortezomib and dexamethasone. In a Phase III clinical trial evaluating bortezomib and dexamethasone in combination with panobinostat or placebo in patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory MM (PANORAMA 1), panobinostat led to a significant increase in median progression-free survival. Panobinostat is currently under regulatory review with a recent accelerated approval granted for the treatment of relapsed disease, in which both bortezomib and immunomodulatory drugs have failed. Here, we summarize the preclinical, pharmacokinetic and clinical data for panobinostat in MM.     

An analysis of clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of single-agent thalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

Given that the efficacy/safety of thalidomide for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma have not been well characterized in a randomized, controlled setting, an analysis of larger, single-agent trials was conducted. Nine trials met the following inclusion criteria: primary population of multiple myeloma; all patients relapsed or refractory; single-agent thalidomide; and sample size ≥50. At median doses of 200 - 800 mg per day, the pooled overall response rate (ORR) was 28.2% (95% CI: 22.6 - 33.7%), including a complete response (CR) rate of 1.6% (95% CI: 0.3 - 2.9%) and partial response rate of 26.0% (95% CI: 20.1 - 32.0%). Response was typically based on M-protein reduction alone. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) incidence varied from 12 - 44%, possibly impacted by the short median follow-up (9 - 29 months). Pooled venous thromboembolism (VTE) incidence was 2.7% (95% CI: 1.1 - 4.3%) and discontinuation due to intolerance (DDI) rate was 14.9% (95% CI: 12.0 - 17.7%). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and PN incidence were not pooled due to lack of reporting and trial heterogeneity. Prognostic factors identified included B₂M (PFS) and advanced age (PFS and OS). Overall, thalidomide demonstrated an ORR approaching 30%, with low CR rate of 1.6% and VTE and DDI incidences of 3% and 15%, respectively.     

The efficacy and safety of bortezomib and dexamethasone as a maintenance therapy in patients with advanced multiple myeloma who are responsive to salvage bortezomib-containing regimens

BACKGROUND:

Although treatment for multiple myeloma (MM) has considerably improved in the past decade, MM continues to be an incurable hematological malignancy that causes most patients to eventually relapse and die from their illness. Thus, the identification of effective salvage strategies remains a priority.

METHODS:

In this trial, the authors evaluated the safety and efficacy of bortezomib and dexamethasone [V: on days 1 and 15 (1.3 mg/mq); D: on days 1‐2 and 15‐16, every 28‐day cycle until progression (20 mg/d)] as maintenance therapy (MT) in patients with advanced MM who responded to salvage therapy that used a bortezomib‐containing regimen.

RESULTS:

Forty‐nine MM patients were enrolled in this study between October of 2004 and April of 2008. All patients who were included in this study were responsive to a prior salvage therapy with bortezomib and had a measurable disease. The bortezomib and dexamethasone MT improved the quality of responses to complete remission in 4 patients and very good partial response in 3 patients. In addition, 10 patients experienced at least a 50% improvement in their symptoms. The median time to progression (TTP) was 16 months with a progression‐free survival of 61% after 1 year. The overall response after 1 year was 76%, and the cumulative incidence of death due to disease progression, which was adjusted for competitive risk events, was 14%. Non‐dose‐limiting toxicities included neuropathy (predominantly grade 1), herpes zoster reactivation, pneumonia, and gastrointestinal affections (constipation and diarrhea). Three patients developed grade 2 neuropathy, which required a bortezomib dose reduction to 1.0 mg/mq. No grade 3 or 4 toxicities were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS:

The use of bortezomib and dexamethasone as MT in advanced MM was effective and well tolerated. The twice‐monthly bortezomib infusion appeared to reduce the incidence of grade 3 and 4 neuropathies in comparison to similar experiences in other settings. Cancer 2011. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

Choosing treatment options for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a clonal plasma cell disorder that is still incurable using conventional treatments. Over the last decade, advances in front-line therapy have led to an increase in survival, but there are still some doubts in the case of relapsed/refractory disease. We searched the PubMed database for articles on treatment options for patients with relapsed/refractory MM published between 1996 and 2013. These treatments included hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), rechallenges using previous chemotherapy regimens, and trials of new regimens. The introduction of new agents such as the immunomodulatory drugs (IMIDs) thalidomide and lenalidomide, and the first-in-its-class proteasome inhibitor bortezomib, has greatly improved clinical outcomes in patients with relapsed/refractory MM, but not all patients respond and those that do may eventually relapse or become refractory to treatment. The challenge is therefore to select the optimal treatment for each patient by balancing efficacy and toxicity. To do this, it is necessary to consider disease-related factors, such as the quality and duration of responses to previous therapies, and the aggressiveness of the relapse, and patient-related factors such as age, comorbidities, performance status, pre-existing toxicities and cytogenetic patterns. The message from the trials reviewed in this article is that the new agents may be used to re-treat relapsed/refractory disease, and that the sequencing of their administration should be modulated on the basis of the various disease and patient-related factors. Moreover, our understanding of the pharmacology and molecular action of the new drugs will contribute to the possibility of developing tailored treatment.     

The combination of intermediate doses of thalidomide and dexamethasone reduces bone marrow micro-vessel density but not serum levels of angiogenic cytokines in patients with refractory/relapsed multiple myeloma

The aim of the study was the evaluation of anti-angiogenic activity of the combination of intermediate doses of thalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with refractory/relapsed myeloma. Twenty-five patients were included in the study. Microvessel density (MVD) was evaluated in marrow biopsies before and after treatment. Serum levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), basic fibroblast growth factor (b-FGF), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), which have angiogenic potential and interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-1beta, soluble IL-6 receptor (sIL-6R), and transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta) which are involved in the disease biology, were measured before treatment and then every 2 weeks for 8 weeks. Pretreatment levels of MVD, VEGF, b-FGF, IL-6, sIL-6R were increased in the patients compared to controls. The overall response rate to therapy was 72%. The administration of the combined regimen produced a significant reduction in MVD in responders. However, an increase in serum levels of VEGF, b-FGF, IL-6, sIL-6R was observed post-treatment in responders. In contrast, serum levels of TNF-alpha, TGF-beta, IL-1beta did not differ between patients and controls and remained unchanged during the study. These results suggest that the combination of thalidomide plus dexamethasone is an effective treatment for myeloma reducing MVD marrow levels but not serum levels of angiogenic cytokines or cytokines implicated in myeloma biology.     

Pomalidomide alone or in combination with dexamethasone in Japanese patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma

This phase 1, open‐label, dose‐escalation study investigated the tolerated dose (recommended dose), safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of pomalidomide alone or pomalidomide plus low‐dose dexamethasone in Japanese patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Twelve patients were enrolled. Patients received pomalidomide 2 mg (Cohort 1) or 4 mg (Cohort 2) orally on day 1 and days 3–21 of a 28‐day cycle. The tolerated dose of pomalidomide was determined to be 4 mg given on days 1–21 of a 28‐day cycle. Efficacy outcomes with pomalidomide plus low‐dose dexamethasone were consistent with those of previous studies. Responses (partial response or better) were achieved by three patients (25%; 1 [17%] in Cohort 1 and 2 [33%] in Cohort 2), and the median time to response was 6.4 months overall (9.0 months for Cohort 1 and 4.2 months for Cohort 2). The median progression‐free survival was 5.5 months overall (5.1 months for Cohort 1 and not reached for Cohort 2). The most frequently occurring grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia (67%), anemia (25%), lymphopenia (25%), and pneumonia (25%), consistent with previous studies of pomalidomide plus low‐dose dexamethasone in refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Further investigation of pomalidomide is recommended for Japanese patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01568294).     

Combined pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and bortezomib is highly effective in patients with recurrent or refractory multiple myeloma who received prior thalidomide/lenalidomide therapy

BACKGROUND: Recently, the authors reported improved time to disease progression (TTP) with a combination of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) and bortezomib compared with bortezomib alone in a phase 3 randomized trial in patients with recurrent/refractory multiple myeloma (MM). In the current analysis, they determined 1) the efficacy of PLD plus bortezomib versus bortezomib alone in patients with MM who had failed on prior thalidomide/lenalidomide (immunomodulatory drug [IMiD]) treatment and 2) the efficacy and safety profile of PLD plus bortezomib in IMiD-exposed and IMiD-naive patients. METHODS: This prespecified analysis included 646 patients who were randomized to receive either PLD with bortezomib (n=324; 194 IMiD-naive patients and 130 IMiD-exposed patients) or bortezomib alone (n=322; 184 IMiD-naive patients and 138 IMiD-exposed patients). The primary efficacy endpoint was TTP, and secondary endpoints included overall survival, response rate, and safety. RESULTS: The median TTP was significantly longer with PLD plus bortezomib compared with bortezomib alone in IMiD-exposed patients (270 days vs 205 days). No statistical difference was noted with respect to TTP between IMiD-naive (295 days) versus IMiD-exposed (270 days) subgroups who received PLD plus bortezomib. A sustained trend favoring combination therapy was observed in analyses of overall survival. In patients who achieved a response, the response duration was comparable for IMiD-naive patients and IMiD-exposed patients in the combination treatment group and lasted a median of 310 days and 319 days, respectively. The incidence of grade 3/4 adverse events was similar with PLD plus bortezomib regardless of prior IMiD exposure. CONCLUSIONS: A significantly prolonged TTP was observed with combined PLD plus bortezomib combination therapy compared with bortezomib alone despite prior IMiD exposure. For the combination treatment arm in the IMiD-naive and IMiD-exposed subgroups, TTP was comparable. Similarly, the safety profile of the PLD plus bortezomib combination was unaltered by prior IMiD exposure.     

Bortezomib,melphalan, and prednisone in elderly patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND:

In elderly patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM), the addition of bortezomib to standard, combined oral melphalan and prednisone (MP) significantly increases the response rate and event‐free survival compared with MP alone.

METHODS:

In this phase 1/2 trial, the authors assessed the dosing, efficacy, and safety of a lower dose‐intensity MP schedule plus weekly bortezomib as salvage treatment for elderly patients with MM. To assess the maximum tolerated dose, 19 patients who had relapsed/refractory MM after 1 or 2 lines of treatment entered the first phase of the study. They received melphalan at a dose of 24 mg for 28 days; bortezomib 1.3 mg/m² on days 1, 8, 15, and 22; and prednisone at a dose of 50 mg every other day of a 28‐day cycle for a total of 9 cycles. At the end of the first phase, based on the good efficacy and acceptable toxicity of this combination, an additional 23 patients were enrolled.

RESULTS:

After a median follow‐up of 21 months, of 42 patients who relapsed, 24 (57%) obtained at least a partial response, 4 had stable disease, and 11 had progressive disease. The median time to progression was 18 months, and the median overall survival was 30 months. Grade 3 and 4 toxicity was observed in 16 of 42 patients (38%) and was more frequent during the early cycles.

CONCLUSIONS:

A weekly infusion of bortezomib associated with lower dose‐intensity MP induced a high proportion of responses and was well tolerated in elderly patients with relapsed/refractory MM. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

反应停联合DICE方案治疗难治性复发型非霍奇金淋巴瘤疗效分析

目的:观察反应停联合DICE方案治疗难治性复发型非霍奇金淋巴瘤(NHL)的临床疗效及不良反应.方法:将64例难治性/复发型NHL患者随机分为两组,对照组采用DICE方案治疗,治疗组采用反应停联合DICE方案治疗,以21d为1个周期,对完成4个周期以上者进行疗效评价随访1年和2年生存率.结果:治疗组32例中完全缓解(CR)l5例(46.88%),部分缓解(PR)8例(25.00%),总有效率71.88%;对照组32例中CR 8例(25.00%),PR 6例(18.75%),总有效率为46.88%,两组比较有显著性差异.治疗组1年生存率和2年生存率分别为81.25% (26/32)和56.25% (18/32 ),对照组1年生存率和2年生存率分别为 75.0% (24/32)和40.62%(13/32),较之对照组,治疗组1年生存率有增加趋势,但统计学比较无差异,而2年生存率两组比较有统计学差异(P<0.05).结论:反应停联合DICE方案治疗难治性复发型NHL疗效满意,不良反应可以耐受,值得进一步研究应用.     

The efficacy and safety of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma patients with impaired renal function

BACKGROUND:

In patients with multiple myeloma, renal impairment (RI) at the time of diagnosis is associated with poor survival. To the authors' knowledge, the current retrospective analysis presented is the first to assess the impact of various degrees of renal dysfunction on safety and efficacy outcomes in a large cohort of patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma who received treatment with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone.

METHODS:

Three hundred fifty‐three patients from 2 large phase 3 trials were randomized to receive lenalidomide (25 mg) plus dexamethasone (40 mg). For the purpose of this analysis, RI was defined according to the calculated creatinine clearance (CL_Cr) level as follows: mild or no RI (CL_Cr ≥ 60 mL/minute), moderate RI (CL_Cr from ≥ 30 mL/minute to <60 mL/minute), and severe RI (CL_Cr <30 mL/minute).

RESULTS:

The RI subgroups did not differ significantly in terms of the overall response rate (range, 50%‐64%) or response quality (very good partial response or better, 27%‐37%). In all RI subgroups, the time to progression and progression‐free survival did not differ significantly compared with the mild or no RI group. Patients with RI experienced an increased incidence of thrombocytopenia, required more frequent lenalidomide dose reduction or interruption, and had shorter overall survival than patients with mild or no RI (P = .006). Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone led to improvement in renal function in the majority of patients.

CONCLUSIONS:

The results from this study indicated that, with careful monitoring of the CL_Cr level and adverse events as well as appropriate dose adjustments, lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is an effective and well tolerated treatment option for patients with multiple myeloma who have RI. Cancer 2010. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

Sorafenib in patients with refractory or recurrent multiple myeloma

Sorafenib is a small molecular inhibitor of several tyrosine protein kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, platelet‐derived growth factor receptor and rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma kinases, targeting signal transduction and angiogenic pathways. It is approved for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma. The objectives of this prospective phase II trial were to assess the activity and tolerability of sorafenib in patients with recurrent or refractory myeloma. In total, 11 patients were enrolled. Patients received 2 × 200 mg of sorafenib orally twice daily until completing 13 full cycles or disease progression. Of the side effects, 8.8% grade 3 and 1.1% grade 4 occurred. Sorafenib treatment was effective in two patients who achieved a partial response and a continuous stable disease with duration of 24.4 months and 6.9 month, respectively. Further clinical investigations are recommended to investigate sorafenib single agent activity in myeloma subgroups with ras‐/BRAF‐/vascular endothelial growth factor receptor pathway activation and combination therapy approaches. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A phase II multicenter study of troxacitabine in relapsed or refractory lymphoproliferative neoplasms or multiple myeloma

Options for patients with relapsed/refractory lymphoproliferative disorders and multiple myeloma are currently limited. Troxacitabine has shown promise in preclinical studies in a variety of malignancies; hence, the current study was conducted to evaluate the activity of troxacitabine in relapsed or refractory lymphoid malignancies. This was a phase II, open-label, multinational, multicenter study of patients with relapsed or refractory lymphoproliferative disorders or multiple myeloma. Thirty-four adults were enrolled in the study and received the study drug at either 5.4 mg/m² (n = 16) or 4.3 mg/m² (n = 18). The dose was decided in a phase I study, during which dose escalation was carried to reach a maximum tolerated dose with an acceptable toxicity profile. Two separate phase I studies were performed in Europe and the US. Troxacitabine was administered by intravenous infusion over 30 min daily for days 1 - 5 every 4 weeks. Treatment was continued to disease progression or until the subjects met criteria for withdrawal or unacceptable toxicities were evident as outlined in the protocol. Two patients had a partial response (PR) to treatment with troxacitabine to yield an overall response rate of 13%. There were no complete responses seen with the drug. Stable disease was achieved in 15 patients (44%). All patients had at least one treatment related adverse event, which led to six withdrawals from the study. Hematologic toxicity constituted the most common adverse events. Serious adverse effects were seen in 62% of patients. None of the 13 deaths were attributed directly to troxacitabine. As a single agent, troxacitabine has limited benefit in patients with advanced lymphoproliferative disorders or multiple myeloma. Future studies will be needed to address modified dosing according to emerging pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data and combination therapy which may lead to improved clinical benefit for troxacitabine in hematologic malignancies.