Continuous treatment with lenalidomide and low‐dose dexamethasone in transplant‐ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in Asia: subanalysis of the FIRST trial

The phase 3 FIRST (Frontline Investigation of REVLIMID + Dexamethasone Versus Standard Thalidomide) trial demonstrated that lenalidomide plus low‐dose dexamethasone (Rd) until disease progression (Rd continuous) is an effective treatment option for transplant‐ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Given genetic differences between Asian and Western populations, this subanalysis of the FIRST trial examined the safety and efficacy of Rd (given continuously or for 18 cycles [Rd18]) and MPT (melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide) in 114 Asian patients from Mainland China, South Korea and Taiwan. Efficacy and safety with Rd continuous in Asian patients were consistent with those in the overall study population. The overall response rates were 77·8% for Rd continuous, 57·5% for MPT and 65·8% for Rd18. The risk of progression or death was reduced by 39% with Rd continuous versus MPT and by 35% with Rd continuous versus Rd18. Rd continuous improved the 3‐year survival rate compared with MPT (70·2% vs. 56·4%) and Rd18 (58·1%). Common grade 3/4 adverse events in the Rd continuous and MPT arms were neutropenia (25·0% vs. 43·6%), infection (19·4% vs. 28·2%) and anaemia (19·4% vs. 15·4%), respectively. Thromboembolic event rates were low, and no second primary malignancies were observed. Rd continuous is safe and effective in transplant‐ineligible Asian patients with NDMM.     

Phase Ib trial of the PI3K/mTOR inhibitor voxtalisib (SAR245409) in combination with chemoimmunotherapy in patients with relapsed or refractory B‐cell malignancies

This phase Ib, dose‐escalation study investigated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and preliminary efficacy of the pan‐class I phosphoinositide 3‐kinase (PI3K) and mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor voxtalisib [30 or 50 mg twice daily (BID)], in combination with rituximab (voxtalisib+rituximab) or rituximab plus bendamustine (voxtalisib+rituximab+bendamustine), in relapsed or refractory indolent B‐cell non‐Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), mantle cell lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL). MTD and RP2D of voxtalisib were determined using a 3 + 3 dose‐escalation design. Adverse events (AEs), plasma PK and disease response were recorded. Thirty‐seven patients were enrolled. The RP2D of voxtalisib in combination with rituximab or rituximab+bendamustine was 50 mg BID. Four patients experienced a total of five dose‐limiting toxicities. The most frequent AEs were nausea (45·9%), fatigue (37·8%) headache (32·4%) and pyrexia (32·4%). The most frequent grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia (27·0%), thrombocytopenia (24·3%), anaemia (16·2%) and febrile neutropenia (10·8%). Voxtalisib PK parameters were not affected by co‐administration with rituximab or rituximab+bendamustine. Of 35 efficacy‐evaluable patients, four (11·4%) achieved complete response and 13 (37·1%) achieved partial response. Voxtalisib, in combination with rituximab or rituximab+bendamustine, demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and encouraging anti‐tumour activity in relapsed or refractory B‐cell malignancies.     

A phase IIb trial of vorinostat in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with multiple myeloma refractory to previous lenalidomide‐containing regimens

Clinical trials of vorinostat, a Class I/II histone deacetylase inhibitor, in combination with proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory agents have shown activity in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. This phase IIb, open‐label, single‐institution study evaluated the efficacy of vorinostat in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in lenalidomide‐refractory patients. Patients were considered lenalidomide‐refractory if they had no clinical response (<minimal response) on a previous lenalidomide‐containing regimen (lenalidomide non‐responsive) or if they had progressive disease on or within 60 days of discontinuing a previous lenalidomide‐containing regimen (lenalidomide relapsed/refractory). Patients received oral vorinostat 400 mg days 1–7 and 15–21, lenalidomide 25 mg days 1–21, and dexamethasone 40 mg days 1, 8, 15 and 22 in 28‐day cycles. Twenty‐five patients were enrolled, median age was 65 years and patients had received a median of 5 prior regimens. The overall response rate was 24% (6 partial responses) and clinical benefit rate (≥stable disease) was 80%. Median time to a partial response was 1·9 months and median duration of response was 3·3 months. Median progression‐free survival was 5·3 months. Most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (48%), thrombocytopenia (32%), anaemia (20%) and gastrointestinal toxicities (16%). In this heavily pre‐treated population, vorinostat in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone was active in lenalidomide‐refractory patients.     

A phase 2 study of modified lenalidomide,bortezomib and dexamethasone in transplant‐ineligible multiple myeloma

We sought a regimen that incorporates optimal novel agents and balances efficacy with toxicity in transplant‐ineligible multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Our study evaluated modified lenalidomide‐bortezomib‐dexamethasone (RVD lite) in this population and was administered over a 35‐day cycle. Lenalidomide 15 mg was given orally on days 1–21; bortezomib 1·3 mg/m² weekly subcutaneously on days 1, 8, 15 and 22; and dexamethasone 20 mg orally was given on the day of and day after bortezomib for 9 cycles followed by 6 cycles of consolidation with lenalidomide and bortezomib. The primary objective was to evaluate the overall response rate (ORR); secondary objectives included safety, progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Fifty‐three eligible patients were screened between April 2013 and May 2015; 50 received at least one dose of therapy. Median age at study entry was 73 years (range 65–91). The ORR was 86% and 66% of patients achieved a very good partial response or better. Median PFS was 35·1 months (95% confidence interval 30·9–not reached) and median OS was not reached at a median follow‐up of 30 months. Peripheral neuropathy was reported in 31 (62%) patients with only 1 patient experiencing grade 3 symptoms. RVD lite is a well‐tolerated and highly effective regimen, with robust PFS and OS, in the transplant‐ineligible MM population.     

Management of adverse events associated with ixazomib plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

The oral proteasome inhibitor ixazomib is approved in the United States, European Union and other countries, in combination with oral lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd), for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who have received at least one prior therapy. Approval was based on the global, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled Phase III TOURMALINE‐MM1 study of ixazomib‐Rd (IRd) versus placebo‐Rd in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. IRd resulted in a significant improvement in progression‐free survival versus placebo‐Rd (median: 20·6 vs. 14·7 months; hazard ratio 0·74). Common toxicities observed more commonly with IRd versus placebo‐Rd were thrombocytopenia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, constipation, rash, peripheral neuropathy, peripheral oedema and back pain; these were generally grade 1/2 in severity except for thrombocytopenia (19% vs. 9% grade 3/4), which appeared manageable and reversible, with no differences between arms in significant bleeding or dose discontinuations. No cumulative toxicities were observed, indicating the potential feasibility of long‐term IRd treatment. Safety data from TOURMALINE‐MM1 are reviewed and guidance for managing clinically relevant adverse events associated with IRd is provided. Most toxicities were manageable with supportive care and dose delays or reductions as needed. Clinicians should be aware of and understand these potential side effects to optimise and prolong patient benefit.     

Elotuzumab in combination with thalidomide and low‐dose dexamethasone: a phase 2 single‐arm safety study in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Elotuzumab is an immunostimulatory, humanized immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody that selectively targets and kills signalling lymphocytic activation molecule family member 7–expressing myeloma cells. We evaluated the safety and tolerability of elotuzumab 10 mg/kg combined with thalidomide 50–200 mg and dexamethasone 40 mg (with/without cyclophosphamide 50 mg) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The primary endpoint was the proportion of grade ≥3 non‐haematological adverse events (AEs); other endpoints included the number of dose reductions/discontinuations and efficacy. Forty patients were treated, who had a median of three previous therapies, including bortezomib (98%) and lenalidomide (73%). Grade ≥3 non‐haematological AEs were reported in 63% of patients, most commonly asthenia (35%) and peripheral oedema (25%). Six (15%) patients had an infusion reaction. Twenty‐six (65%) patients had ≥1 dose reduction/discontinuation due to an AE, none related to elotuzumab. Overall response rate was 38%; median progression‐free survival was 3·9 months. Median overall survival was 16·3 months and the 1‐year survival rate was 63%. Minimal incremental toxicity was observed with addition of elotuzumab to thalidomide/dexamethasone with or without cyclophosphamide, and efficacy data suggest clinical benefit in a highly pre‐treated population. Elotuzumab combined with thalidomide may provide an additional treatment option for patients with RRMM.     

A phase 1 clinical trial evaluating marizomib,pomalidomide and low‐dose dexamethasone in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (NPI‐0052‐107): final study results

Marizomib (MRZ) is an irreversible, pan‐subunit proteasome inhibitor (PI) in clinical development for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and glioma. This study analysed MRZ, pomalidomide (POM) and low‐dose dexamethasone (Lo‐DEX) [PMD] in RRMM to evaluate safety and determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D). Intravenous MRZ (0·3–0·5 mg/m²) was administered over 2 h on days 1, 4, 8, 11; POM (3–4 mg) on days 1–21; and Lo‐DEX (5 or 10 mg) on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16, 22 and 23 of every 28‐day cycle. Thirty‐eight patients were enrolled that had received a median of 4 (range 1–10) prior lines of therapy; all patients received prior lenalidomide and bortezomib. No dose‐limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed and 0·5 mg/m² MRZ was determined to be the RP2D. The most common treatment‐related ≥Grade 3 adverse events were: neutropenia (11/38 patients: 29%), pneumonia (4/38 patients 11%), anaemia (4/38 patients; 11%) and thrombocytopenia (4/38 patients; 11%). The overall response rate and clinical benefit rate was 53% (19/36) and 64% (23/36), respectively. In conclusion, PMD was well tolerated and demonstrated promising activity in heavily pre‐treated, high‐risk RRMM patients.     

Bendamustine,lenalidomide and dexamethasone (BRd) has high activity as 2nd‐line therapy for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma – a phase II trial

The combination of lenalidomide (Revlimid^®, R) and dexamethasone (d) is a standard regimen for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (rrMM ). With this regimen, only a small fraction of patients will achieve high quality responses [≥ very good partial response (VGPR )]. The combination of bendamustine (B), lenalidomide and dexamethasone (BR d) has shown high efficacy in patients with advanced rrMM . However, dose‐limiting haematotoxicity restricted its use in extensively pre‐treated patient populations. This prospective, multicentre Phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of BR d in rrMM patients with one prior line of therapy. Fifty patients were enrolled (median age 68·5 years [range 46–83]) and were treated with B 75 mg/m² days 1, 2; R 25 mg days 1–21 and d (40/20 mg) days 1, 8, 15 and 22, for 6 28‐day induction cycles, followed by 12 cycles with Rd alone. Pegfilgrastim was administered according to protocol‐defined criteria. The study aimed to demonstrate a complete response (CR )/VGPR rate of >40% after induction therapy. Of 45 evaluable patients, 23 (51%) achieved a CR /VGPR . Grade 4 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia occurred in 17 (34%) and 8 (16%) of patients, respectively. BR d is a safe and efficacious regimen as a second line treatment for rrMM , leading to high quality responses in a considerable proportion of patients.     

Daratumumab,bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed and relapsed multiple myeloma: LYRA study

This United States community study evaluated the combination of daratumumab, bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (D-VCd) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) and relapsed multiple myeloma (RMM). Patients received 4–8 induction cycles of bortezomib 1·5 mg/m², cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m² and dexamethasone 40 mg weekly. Intravenous daratumumab 16 mg/kg was administered as approved except for a split-first dose in Cycle 1. Eligible patients underwent autologous stem cell transplantation. All patients received ≤12 daratumumab maintenance doses monthly. Eighty-six NDMM and 14 RMM patients received ≥1 treatment dose. In NDMM patients, very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) and overall response rates after 4 induction cycles were 44% (primary endpoint) and 79%, respectively, and 56% and 81% at end of induction. The 12-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 87%. Efficacy was also observed in RMM patients. Fatigue (59%) and neutropenia (13%) were the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and grade 3/4 TEAE, respectively. Infusion reactions occurred in 54% of patients, primarily during the first dose, and were mild (2% grade 3). The first 2 daratumumab infusions were 4·5 and 3·8 h (median). Overall, D-VCd was well tolerated, split-first daratumumab dosing was feasible, the ≥VGPR rate after 4 cycles was 44% and the 1-year PFS rate was 87%.     

Single‐agent lenalidomide in relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma: results from a UK phase II study suggest activity and possible gender differences

We present data from a phase II study investigating a novel treatment strategy for relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Twenty‐six patients received lenalidomide 25 mg/d (days 1–21 of a 28‐d cycle) for up to 6 cycles followed by low‐dose maintenance lenalidomide (15 mg) in responding patients. Eight patients achieved complete or partial response to give an overall response rate of 31% with median response duration of 22·2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 0·0–53·6] and median progression‐free survival (PFS) of 3·9 months (95% CI 0·0–11·1). An additional six patients (23%) achieved stable disease. Eleven patients received maintenance with median PFS of 14·6 months (95% CI 7·3–21·9). Correlative studies showed that peripheral T and Natural Killer (NK) cells increased in responding patients by 40–60% over the first 6 cycles with an initial dip in NK cells suggestive of tumour infiltration. Peripheral regulatory T cells were increased in MCL patients (P = 0·001) and expanded further following lenalidomide. Sequential plasma analysis showed increased IL12 p40 and IL7 alongside decreased MMP9, IL10, and adiponectin. Finally, a significant correlation (P = 0·02) between gender and response suggested that female MCL patients were more sensitive to lenalidomide than males. In summary, we confirm the activity, safety and immunomodulatory properties of lenalidomide in MCL and highlight its potential as a low‐dose maintenance agent.     

Lenalidomide in combination with R‐ESHAP in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma: a phase 1b study from GELTAMO group

Diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients failing rituximab‐containing therapy have a poor outcome with the current salvage regimens. We conducted a phase 1b trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of lenalidomide in combination with R‐ESHAP (rituximab, etoposide, cisplatin, cytarabine, methylprednisolone) (LR‐ESHAP) in patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL. Efficacy data were collected as a secondary objective. Subjects received 3 cycles of lenalidomide at escalating doses (5, 10 or 15 mg) given on days 1–14 of every 21‐day cycle, in combination with R‐ESHAP. Responding patients received BEAM (carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan) followed by autologous stem‐cell transplantation. Lenalidomide 10 mg/d was identified as the MTD because, in the 15 mg cohort, one patient experienced dose‐limiting toxicity (grade 3 angioedema) and two patients had mobilization failure. A total of 19 patients (3, 12 and 4 in the 5, 10 and 15 mg cohorts, respectively) were evaluable. All toxicities occurring during LR‐ESHAP cycles resolved appropriately and no grade 4–5 non‐haematological toxicities were observed. The complete remission and overall response rates were 47·4% and 78·9%, respectively. With a median follow‐up of 24·6 (17·4–38·2) months, the 2‐year progression‐free survival and overall survival were 44% and 63%, respectively. In conclusion, the LR‐ESHAP regimen is feasible and yields encouraging outcomes.     

Upfront lower dose lenalidomide is less toxic and does not compromise efficacy for vulnerable patients with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma: final analysis of the phase II RevLite study

The combination of lenalidomide and dexamethasone is an established treatment for patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Increasingly, treatment attenuation is advocated for frail/elderly patients to minimize toxicity even though there have been no prospective studies to demonstrate whether lenalidomide dose attenuation impacts on response and survival outcome. This prospective multicentre phase II study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of lower dose lenalidomide (15 mg) and dexamethasone (20 mg) in 149 eligible patients with relapsed/refractory MM aged over 59 years and/or with renal impairment. The overall response rate was 71% (complete response 15%). Median (range) progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 8·9 (6·9–11·5) and 30·5 (20·0–36·2) months, respectively. Upon formal statistical comparison of these endpoints to that of a matched cohort of patients from the pivotal phase III MM009/MM010 studies who received standard‐dose lenalidomide (25 mg) and high‐dose dexamethasone (40 mg) no difference was seen in PFS (P = 0·34) and OS (P = 0·21). Importantly, grade 3–4 toxicities were reduced with low‐dose lenalidomide, mainly lower neutropenia (29% vs. 41%), infections (23% vs. 31%) and venous thromboembolism (3% vs. 13%). This study supports a strategy of lenalidomide dose reduction at the outset for at‐risk patients, and prospectively confirms that such an approach reduces adverse events while not compromising patient response or survival outcomes.     

Lenalidomide plus rituximab can produce durable clinical responses in patients with relapsed or refractory,indolent non‐Hodgkin lymphoma

This phase II study evaluated the safety and efficacy of lenalidomide in combination with rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory, indolent non‐Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Patients were treated with daily lenalidomide in 28‐d cycles and weekly rituximab for 4 weeks. Lenalidomide was continued until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Twenty‐two patients were assessed for FCGR3A polymorphisms. Thirty patients were enrolled; 27 were evaluable for response. The overall response rate (ORR) was 74% including 44% complete responses (CR); median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 12·4 months. The 13 rituximab refractory patients had an ORR of 61·5% (four CR/unconfirmed CR). The ORR was 77% in the 22 follicular lymphoma patients (nine CR/unconfirmed CR). At a median follow‐up time of 43 months, the median duration of response and time to next therapy were 15·4 and 37·4 months, respectively. Most common grade 3/4 adverse events were lymphopenia (45%), neutropenia (55%), fatigue (23%) and hyponatraemia (9%). The ORR and PFS in patients with low‐affinity FCGR3A polymorphisms (F/F and F/V) suggest that lenalidomide may improve the activity of rituximab in these patients. These data suggest that combining lenalidomide with rituximab can produce durable responses with acceptable toxicity in patients with indolent NHL.     

Efficacy and safety of low‐dose lenalidomide plus dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory POEMS syndrome

Although autologous stem cell transplantation or melphalan‐based chemotherapy has significantly improved the prognosis of POEMS syndrome, a few patients will relapse or be refractory to primary therapy, and there is a lack of studies regarding these patients. In this study, we used low‐dose lenalidomide (10 mg daily) and dexamethasone (40 mg, once weekly) to treat twelve patients with relapsed (n = 8) or refractory (n = 4) POEMS syndrome. After a median follow‐up time of 20 months, the overall hematologic response rate was 77% with 44% having a complete response. Eight (67%) patients had neurological response, and the median overall neuropathy limitation scale score was reduced from 3 (range, 1–9) to 2 (range, 0–6). Serum vascular endothelial growth factor response rate was 91% and 46% of patients had normal serum VEGF levels. One patient had progression of the disease 3 months after the end of treatment and subsequently died from the disease. Therefore, the estimated 2 year overall survival and progression‐free survival were 92%. The low‐dose lenalidomide and dexamethasone regimen was well tolerated, with no treatment‐related death or any grade 3 or 4 toxicity. In conclusion, low‐dose lenalidomide plus dexamethasone therapy is an effective and safe regimen for patients with relapsed or refractory POEMS syndrome.     

Endothelial stress products and coagulation markers in patients with multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone: an observational study

In this prospective study of patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM) treated with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, relationships between markers of endothelial stress and drug administration and incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) were assessed. Of 33 enrolled patients, laboratory and treatment data were available for 32 patients. Of these, 23 received pulsed dexamethasone (40 mg/day on days 1–4, 9–12 and 17–21 of each 28‐day cycle) and 9 received weekly dexamethasone (40 mg/day on days 1, 8, 15 and 21 of each cycle). The overall incidence of VTE was 9%. A decreasing trend in markers values was observed with intercellular adhesion molecule (P = 0·05), fibrinogen (P = 0·008), plasminogen activator inhibitor‐1 (P < 0·001), homocysteine (P = 0·002) and P–selectin (P < 0·001) during therapy. Compared with weekly dexamethasone, pulsed dexamethasone was associated with significantly greater variation in mean adjusted relative values of fibrinogen, P‐selectin and vascular endothelial growth factor (P < 0·001 for all comparisons), although there was no apparent association with VTE incidence. Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone affects endothelial stress marker levels in patients with advanced MM. The higher variation seen with pulsed dexamethasone suggests greater endothelial stress with this approach.     

Combination therapy with bortezomib,continuous low‐dose cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone followed by one year of maintenance treatment for relapsed multiple myeloma patients

Combination therapy for longer periods but at low dose might be an effective and tolerable manner to treat patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). We used bortezomib, dexamethasone and low‐dose oral cyclophosphamide as an induction regimen, followed by 1 year of maintenance consisting of bortezomib and cyclophosphamide. Relapsed MM patients were treated with six cycles of bortezomib twice weekly, cyclophosphamide 50 mg daily and dexamethasone. Maintenance therapy was given for 1 year. Primary endpoints were toxicity during re‐induction and maintenance therapy. Secondary endpoints were response to treatment and progression‐free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). This study included 59 patients. Myelosuppression and neuropathy were the most common side effects. Median follow‐up was 27·1 (0·46–54·4) months with an overall response of 71%, and a very good partial response or more of 33%. During maintenance, improved responsiveness was observed in 19% of the patients. The median PFS was 18·4 months (range 0·13–43·5) and the median OS was 28·1 months (range 0·13–54·4). In conclusion, our study demonstrates that treatment with bortezomib, dexamethasone and low‐dose cyclophosphamide is an effective and manageable regimen. Adding 1 year of maintenance was feasible, with limited side effects and an increased response rate.     

Patient‐reported health‐related quality of life from the phase III TOURMALINE‐MM1 study of ixazomib‐lenalidomide‐dexamethasone versus placebo‐lenalidomide‐dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

TOURMALINE‐MM1 is a phase III, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study of ixazomib plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRd) versus placebo‐Rd in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma following 1–3 prior lines of therapy. The study met its primary endpoint, demonstrating significantly longer progression‐free survival (PFS) in the IRd arm versus placebo‐Rd arm (median 20.6 vs 14.7 months, hazard ratio 0.74, P = .01), with limited additional toxicity. Patient‐reported health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) was a secondary endpoint of TOURMALINE‐MM1. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core‐30 (QLQ‐C30) and Multiple Myeloma Module 20 (QLQ‐MY20) were completed at screening, the start of cycles 1 and 2, every other cycle, the end of treatment, and every 4 weeks until progression. Over median follow‐up of 23.3 and 22.9 months in the IRd and placebo‐Rd arms, mean QLQ‐C30 global health status (GHS)/QoL scores were maintained from baseline over the course of treatment in both groups, with no statistically significant differences between groups. EORTC QLQ‐C30 function domain scores were also generally maintained from baseline; similarly, physical, emotional, and social function domains were maintained with IRd versus placebo‐Rd, with slightly higher mean change from baseline scores at earlier time points with IRd. Findings from this double‐blind study demonstrate that addition of ixazomib to Rd significantly improved efficacy while HRQoL was maintained, reflecting the limited additional toxicity seen with IRd versus placebo‐Rd, and support the feasibility of long‐term IRd administration.     

Phase II study of bendamustine,bortezomib and dexamethasone (BBD) in the first‐line treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who are not candidates for high dose chemotherapy

The combination of bendamustine, bortezomib and dexamethasone (BBD ) was evaluated as a first‐line therapy for multiple myeloma. The original treatment regimen of bendamustine 80 mg/m², days 1, 4; bortezomib 1·3 mg/m², days 1, 4, 8, 11; dexamethasone 40 mg, days 1, 2, 3, 4 on a 28‐day cycle (up to 8 cycles) was efficacious but determined relatively toxic in an interim analysis. The regimen was amended to bendamustine 80 mg/m², days 1, 2; bortezomib 1·3 mg/m², days 1, 8, 15; dexamethasone 20 mg, days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 every 28 days (up to 8 cycles), then maintenance 1·3 mg/m² IV bortezomib every 2 weeks. Fifty‐nine patients were enrolled. Primary endpoint was complete response (CR) rate. The original schema was given for a median of 7 cycles (range 1–8); modified schema was given for a median of 8 cycles (range 1‐8) plus maintenance. Overall response was 91%, CR was 9%. Median follow‐up was 19·1 months; median progression‐free survival was 11·1 months and 18·9 months on the original and modified regimens, respectively. The most common Grade 3/4 adverse events were fatigue and neuropathy. The combination of BBD is tolerable and efficacious in this patient population. Modifications to decrease intensity but increase duration translated to better outcomes.     

A phase 2 study of inotuzumab ozogamicin in patients with indolent B‐cell non‐Hodgkin lymphoma refractory to rituximab alone,rituximab and chemotherapy,or radioimmunotherapy

This phase 2 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) in patients with indolent B‐cell non‐Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) refractory to rituximab alone, rituximab plus chemotherapy or anti‐CD20 radioimmunotherapy. Patients received InO 1·8 mg/m² intravenously on a 28‐d cycle for a planned 4–8 cycles. The initial InO dose and schedule could be adjusted for tolerability and patients were allowed to receive 2 additional cycles (up to 8 total) after achieving a complete response (CR). The primary endpoint was overall response. Eighty‐one patients were enrolled, among whom 48 (59%) received ≥3 InO cycles and 13 (16%) completed the treatment phase. The overall response rate was 67% (CR, 31%). Median (95% confidence interval) progression‐free survival was 12·7 (8·9–26·9) months; median overall survival was not reached. Haematological adverse events (AEs) were common, particularly thrombocytopenia (74%) and neutropenia (56%). These were also the most common AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (37% and 11%, respectively); 58% of patients reported AEs leading to treatment discontinuation. InO demonstrated robust activity in these heavily pretreated patients, although treatment duration was limited by haematological toxicities. Additional studies may determine dosing regimens that allow for reduced toxicity.     

Lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with POEMS syndrome: results of a prospective,open‐label trial

Given its anti‐angiogenic activity, lenalidomide may have a role in the treatment of POEMS (P eripheral neuropathy, O rganomegaly, E ndocrinopathy, M onoclonal plasma cell disorder and S kin changes) syndrome. This prospective, open‐label, pilot study evaluated the combination of lenalidomide + dexamethasone (RD) in 18 POEMS syndrome patients (13 pre‐treated, 5 newly‐diagnosed but ineligible for high‐dose therapy). Treatment consisted of six cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg/day for 21 days followed by 7 days rest) plus dexamethasone (40 mg/once a week). Patients responding after six cycles continued treatment until progression or unbearable toxicity. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with either neurological or clinical improvement. The RD combination was considered as deserving further evaluation if 9 of the first 15 patients responded. Ten responses were observed among the first 15 enrolled patients, meeting the primary endpoint. Fifteen of 18 patients (83%) completed six RD cycles: 13 (72%) patients responded and nine had both clinical and neurological improvement. Among the 15 patients who completed the six RD cycles, four were still on treatment after a 25‐month follow‐up. At 39 months of follow‐up, all patients were alive with a 3‐year progression‐free survival of 59%. No patient discontinued RD for toxicity. Overall, the RD regimen showed a high incidence of prolonged symptoms improvement and was well tolerated in most POEMS patients.