Insights on multiple myeloma treatment strategies

The introduction of new agents and management strategies over the past decade has resulted in a major step change in treatment outcomes with deepening responses and increased survival for patients with multiple myeloma. In daily clinical practice, healthcare professionals are now faced with challenges including, optimal treatment sequencing and changing treatment goals. In light of this, a group of experts met to discuss diagnostic and treatment guidelines, examine current clinical practice, and consider how new clinical trial data may be integrated into the management of multiple myeloma in the future

Insights on Multiple Myeloma Treatment Strategies

The introduction of new agents and management strategies over the past decade has resulted in a major step change in treatment outcomes with deepening responses and increased survival for patients with multiple myeloma. In daily clinical practice, healthcare professionals are now faced with challenges including, optimal treatment sequencing and changing treatment goals. In light of this, a group of experts met to discuss diagnostic and treatment guidelines, examine current clinical practice, and consider how new clinical trial data may be integrated into the management of multiple myeloma in the future

Randomized, placebo‐controlled, phase 3 study of perifosine combined with bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed, refractory multiple myeloma previously treated with bortezomib

Abstract Perifosine, an investigational, oral, synthetic alkylphospholipid, inhibits signal transduction pathways of relevance in multiple myeloma (MM) including PI3K/Akt. Perifosine demonstrated anti‐MM activity in preclinical studies and encouraging early‐phase clinical activity in combination with bortezomib. A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled phase 3 study was conducted to evaluate addition of perifosine to bortezomib‐dexamethasone in MM patients with one to four prior therapies who had relapsed following previous bortezomib‐based therapy. The primary endpoint was progression‐free survival (PFS). The study was discontinued at planned interim analysis, with 135 patients enrolled. Median PFS was 22.7 weeks (95% confidence interval 16·0–45·4) in the perifosine arm and 39.0 weeks (18.3–50.1) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio 1.269 [0.817–1.969]; P = .287); overall response rates were 20% and 27%, respectively. Conversely, median overall survival (OS) was 141.9 weeks and 83.3 weeks (hazard ratio 0.734 [0.380–1.419]; P = .356). Overall, 61% and 55% of patients in the perifosine and placebo arms reported grade 3/4 adverse events, including thrombocytopenia (26% vs 14%), anemia (7% vs 8%), hyponatremia (6% vs 8%), and pneumonia (9% vs 3%). These findings demonstrate no PFS benefit from the addition of perifosine to bortezomib‐dexamethasone in this study of relapsed/refractory MM, but comparable safety and OS

Insights on multiple myeloma treatment strategies

The introduction of new agents and management strategies over the past decade has resulted in a major step change in treatment outcomes with deepening responses and increased survival for patients with multiple myeloma. In daily clinical practice, healthcare professionals are now faced with challenges including, optimal treatment sequencing and changing treatment goals. In light of this, a group of experts met to discuss diagnostic and treatment guidelines, examine current clinical practice, and consider how new clinical trial data may be integrated into the management of multiple myeloma in the future