Response-adjusted ISS (RaISS) is a simple and reliable prognostic scoring system for predicting progression-free survival in transplanted patients with multiple myeloma.

Complete response (CR) is associated with better outcome in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) treated with autologous transplant even though the progression-free survival (PFS) can be very variable among patients with good response. No simple and reliable prognostic scoring system, able to predict the duration of response, are so far available. Aim of this study was to identify any correlation between baseline clinical findings, response after transplant and the length of PFS, and thus develop a prognostic model. The new prognostic model was developed in a learning cohort of 549 patients with MM transplanted in five Italian hospitals. The prognostic value of this new score was confirmed in a validation cohort of 276 distinct patients with MM transplanted in two different Italian hospital. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using Cox models. The most important independent baseline predictor of transplant outcome, together with response after transplant, was International Staging System (ISS). We thus incorporated response to transplant and baseline ISS in a new scoring system, named response-adjusted international scoring system (RaISS), that was able to classify patients in three risk groups (low, intermediate, high) with different probabilities of progression after transplant (median PFS 35.9-15.4 months). The prognostic value of this new score was confirmed in the validation cohort. In conclusion, RaISS is a new simple and easily available scoring system that, accurately defining the risk of progression, can allow to identify patients who could deserve further treatment after transplant (consolidation, maintenance)

Long-term outcome in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma treated with thalidomide. Balancing efficacy and side-effects

A total of 303 MM patients were retrospectively reviewed to evaluate long-term efficacy and toxicity of thalidomide alone or in combination with steroids. Overall response rate was 57% (CR/VGPR 12%). Median TTP, PFS and OS were 13.4 months, 20.6 months, and 26.2 months, respectively. PFS and OS were significantly different according to response (p<0.0001), with better outcome in patients achieving CR/VGPR (PFS and OS 35.4 months and 63 months, respectively). PFS and OS of patients achieving SD or PR were overlapping (p=0.3). The addition of steroids significantly increased the response rate (p=0.01). The most clinically relevant complications were neuropathy (40%), constipation (26%), thromboembolic events (7%). Thalidomide was reduced for toxicity in 68 patients (24%) and permanently discontinued in 36 (12%). In conclusion, thalidomide produces high response rate in relapsed/refractory MM. The best outcome is observed in patients with good quality response, but even patients with suboptimal response may obtain durable survival

High-dose idarubicin in combination with Ara-C in patients with relapsed or refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a pharmacokinetic and clinical study

Objective High dose (HD) Ara-C combined with a single HD idarubicin dose (IDA) is an efficient and safe salvage regimen for patients with refractory or relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia as indicated by phase II studies. No data are available on the pharmacokinetics of IDA after a rapid HD intravenous infusion. An open phase II pharmacokinetic and clinical study was performed to evaluate antileukemic efficacy, IDA pharmacokinetics and to investigate the presence of IDA and its reduced metabolite idarubicinol (IDAol) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of patients treated with HD-IDA. Patients and methods Twenty-five patients with refractory or relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia received Ara-C 3 g/m2 from days 1–5, idarubicin (HD-IDA) 40 mg/m2 as rapid intravenous (i.v.) infusion on day 3 and subcutaneous G-CSF 5 &#956;g/kg from day 7 until PMN recovery. Pharmacokinetics of IDA was evaluated after HD idarubicin administration in nine of these patients. CSF samples were collected in 15 patients at different times. IDA and IDAol concentrations were quantified by a validated HPLC assay described in detail elsewhere. Results Eleven patients (44%, 95% CI: 23–65%) achieved complete remission with median disease free survival for 6 months. After administration of HD-IDA i.v. bolus of 40 mg/m2, plasma level profiles of unchanged drug and IDAol were similar to those previously described after standard dose and measured with the same analytical method. The mean terminal half-life measured for IDA in this group of patients (14.9 h) was not significantly different from the mean value observed after standard dose (13.9 h, P = 0.72). IDAol t 1/2 was also similar after HD-IDA (46.2 h) and standard dose (39.4 h, P = 0.79). Pharmacokinetic data reveal that in our series of patients IDA and IDAol clearances are significantly higher than those observed in patients treated with 12 mg/m2 of IDA but, although the administered dose (mg/m2) of the drug is 3.3 times higher, IDA exposure (measured in terms of AUC) is only 2.3 times and IDAol exposition 2.1 times greater. Furthermore, HD infusion resulted in a ratio between the AUC of parent drug and idarubicinol not different from the value observed with the standard-dose. IDA and IDAol were measurable only in 3 of the 15 cerebrospinal fluid samples collected. Conclusion Responses observed in our series are comparable to those reported with other salvage regimens. The IDA exposure lower than expected may explain the safety of the single i.v. administration of 40 mg/m2 of IDA, combined with HD Ara-C, with a degree of myelosuppression equivalent to that reported with this agent administered in standard doses. Our data do not allow us to clearly attribute this behavior to a pharmacokinetic non-linearity since the baseline creatinine clearance, even within normal values, and patient age are significantly different in the two groups. Cerebrospinal fluid penetration was poor, reaching levels not considered as cytotoxic

Stem cell mobilization in patients wuth newly diagnosed multiple myeloma after lenalidomide induction therapy

Lenalidomide has raised concerns regarding its potential impact on the ability to collect stem cells for autologous stem cell transplantation, especially after prolonged exposure. The use of cyclophosphamide plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to mobilize peripheral blood stem cells may overcome this concern. In newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients, we investigated the influence of lenalidomide on stem cell collection. In a prospective study, 346 patients received four cycles of lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd). Stem cells were mobilized with cyclophosphamide and G-CSF. Patients failing to collect a minimum of 4 7 10 6 CD34 +/kg cells received a second mobilization course. After mobilization, a median yield of 8.7 7 10 6 CD34 +/kg was obtained from patients receiving Rd induction. After first mobilization, inadequate yield was observed in 21% of patients, whereas only 9% of patients failed to collect the target yield after the second mobilization attempt. In conclusion, we confirm that a short induction with lenalidomide allowed sufficient stem cells collection to perform autologous transplantation in 91% of newly diagnosed patients

Autologous transplant vs oral chemotherapy and lenalidomide in newly diagnosed young myeloma patients: A pooled analysis

In newly diagnosed myeloma patients, upfront autologous transplant (ASCT) prolongs progression-free survival 1 (PFS1) compared with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide (CC+R). Salvage ASCT at first relapse may still effectively rescue patients who did not receive upfront ASCT. To evaluate the long-term benefit of upfront ASCT vs CC+R and the impact of salvage ASCT in patients who received upfront CC+R, we conducted a pooled analysis of 2 phase III trials (RV-MM-209 and EMN-441). Primary endpoints were PFS1, progression-free survival 2 (PFS2), overall survival (OS). A total of 268 patients were randomized to 2 courses of melphalan 200\u2009mg/m2 and ASCT (MEL200-ASCT) and 261 to CC+R. Median follow-up was 46 months. MEL200-ASCT significantly improved PFS1 (median: 42 vs 24 months, HR 0.53; P<0.001), PFS2 (4 years: 71 vs 54%, HR 0.53, P<0.001) and OS (4 years: 84 vs 70%, HR 0.51, P<0.001) compared with CC+R. The advantage was noticed in good and bad prognosis patients. Only 53% of patients relapsing from CC+R received ASCT at first relapse. Upfront ASCT significantly reduced the risk of death (HR 0.51; P=0.007) in comparison with salvage ASCT. In conclusion, these data confirm the role of upfront ASCT as the standard approach for all young myeloma patients

Aspirin or enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis for newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma patients treated with lenalidomide.

Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is effective in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) but is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). This prospective, open-label, randomized substudy of a phase 3 trial compared the efficacy and safety of thromboprophylaxis with low-dose aspirin (ASA) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with newly diagnosed MM, treated with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone induction and melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide consolidation. Overall, 342 patients who did not have clinical indications or contraindications to antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy were randomly assigned to receive ASA 100 mg/d (n = 176) or LMWH enoxaparin 40 mg/d (n = 166). The incidence of VTE was 2.27% in the ASA group and 1.20% in the LMWH group. Compared with LMWH, the absolute difference in the proportion of VTE was 1.07% (95% confidence interval, -1.69-3.83; P = .452) in the ASA group. Pulmonary embolism was observed in 1.70% of patients in the ASA group and none in the LMWH group. No arterial thrombosis, acute cardiovascular events, or sudden deaths were reported. No major hemorrhagic complications were reported. In previously untreated patients with MM receiving lenalidomide with a low thromboembolic risk, ASA could be an effective and less-expensive alternative to LMWH thromboprophylaxis. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00551928. \ua9 2012 by The American Society of Hematology