Optimising cardiovascular care of patients with multiple myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the third most common haematological malignancy, with increasing prevalence over recent years. Advances in therapy have improved survival, changing the clinical course of MM into a chronic condition and meaning that management of comorbidities is fundamental to improve clinical outcomes. Cardiovascular (CV) events affect up to 7.5% of individuals with MM, due to a combination of patient, disease and treatment-related factors and adversely impact survival. MM typically affects older people, many with pre-existing CV risk factors or established CV disease, and the disease itself can cause renal impairment, anaemia and hyperviscosity, which exacerabate these further. Up to 15% of patients with MM develop systemic amyloidosis, with prognosis determined by the extent of cardiac involvement. Management of MM generally involves administration of multiple treatment lines over several years as disease progresses, with many drug classes associated with adverse CV effects including high rates of venous and arterial thrombosis alongside heart failure. Recommendations for holistic management of patients with MM now include routine baseline risk stratification including ECG and echocardiography and administration of thromboprophylaxis drugs for patients treated with immunomodulatory drugs. Close surveillance of high-risk patients with collaboration between haematology and cardiology is required, with prompt investigation in the event of CV symptoms, in order to identify and treat complications early. Decisions regarding discontinuation of cardiotoxic therapies should be made in a multidisciplinary setting, taking into account the severity of the complication, prognosis, expected benefits and the availability of effective alternatives

Bortezomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone, and panobinostat for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MUK-six): a multicentre, open-label, phase 1/2 trial

Background Panobinostat (a pan histone deacetylase inhibitor) is approved in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma who have received two or more previous lines of therapy. We aimed to improve the safety of this combination and investigate efficacy by incorporating low-dose thalidomide, using sub-cutaneous weekly bortezomib, and determining the maximum tolerated dose of panobinostat in this regimen. Methods We did a phase 1/2, multicentre, open-label trial (MUK six) at four hospitals in the UK, enrolling patients with relapsed, or relapsed and refractory, multiple myeloma aged at least 18 years, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less who had previously received 1–4 lines of therapy. Exclusion criteria included any antimyeloma treatment within 28 days of study drugs (except dexamethasone 160 mg >48 h before treatment). We used a rolling six escalation design to determine the maximum tolerated dose of panobinostat, and allocated patients to receive subcutaneous bortezomib 1·3 mg/m2, and oral thalidomide 100 mg, dexamethasone 20 mg, and panobinostat 10, 15, or 20 mg (escalated to 20 mg according to the escalation schedule). Treatment was given during a 21-day cycle (bortezomib on days 1 and 8; thalidomide every day; dexamethasone on days 1, 2, 8, and 9; and panobinostat on days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, and 12) for 16 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were permitted to come off study for autologous stem cell transplantation. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose and recommended dose of panobinostat, and to estimate the proportion of patients with an overall response that was equal to a partial response or greater within 16 cycles of treatment at the recommended panobinostat dose in the modified intention-to-treat population. We assessed safety in all patients who received a trial drug (ie, bortezomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone, or panobinostat). This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02145715, and with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN59395590 and is closed to recruitment. Findings Between Jan 31, 2013, and Oct 30, 2014, we enrolled 57 eligible patients who received at least one dose of trial medication or any drug. One dose-limiting toxicity was reported (grade 3 hyponatremia at the 20 mg dose), therefore the maximum tolerated dose was not reached, and 20 mg was deemed to be the recommended dose. 46 patients were treated with panobinostat 20 mg (the intention-to-treat population). 42 patients (91%, 80% CI 83·4–96·2) of 46 achieved the primary endpoint of an overall response that was equal to a partial response or greater. Most adverse events were grade 1–2 with few occurrences of grade 3–4 diarrhoea or fatigue. The most common adverse events of grade 3 or worse in the safety population (n=57) were reduced neutrophil count (15 [26%]), hypophosphatemia (11 [19%]), and decreased platelet count (8 [14%]). 46 serious adverse events were reported in 27 patients; of 14 suspected to be related to the trial medication, seven (50%) were gastrointestinal disorders. Interpretation Panobinostat 20 mg in combination with bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone is an efficacious and well tolerated regimen for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma

Advanced Imaging Modalities to Monitor for Cardiotoxicity

OPINION STATEMENT: Early detection and treatment of cardiotoxicity from cancer therapies is key to preventing a rise in adverse cardiovascular outcomes in cancer patients. Over-diagnosis of cardiotoxicity in this context is however equally hazardous, leading to patients receiving suboptimal cancer treatment, thereby impacting cancer outcomes. Accurate screening therefore depends on the widespread availability of sensitive and reproducible biomarkers of cardiotoxicity, which can clearly discriminate early disease. Blood biomarkers are limited in cardiovascular disease and clinicians generally still use generic screening with ejection fraction, based on historical local expertise and resources. Recently, however, there has been growing recognition that simple measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction using 2D echocardiography may not be optimal for screening: diagnostic accuracy, reproducibility and feasibility are limited. Modern cancer therapies affect many myocardial pathways: inflammatory, fibrotic, metabolic, vascular and myocyte function, meaning that multiple biomarkers may be needed to track myocardial cardiotoxicity. Advanced imaging modalities including cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), computed tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET) add improved sensitivity and insights into the underlying pathophysiology, as well as the ability to screen for other cardiotoxicities including coronary artery, valve and pericardial diseases resulting from cancer treatment. Delivering screening for cardiotoxicity using advanced imaging modalities will however require a significant change in current clinical pathways, with incorporation of machine learning algorithms into imaging analysis fundamental to improving efficiency and precision. In the future, we should aspire to personalized rather than generic screening, based on a patient's individual risk factors and the pathophysiological mechanisms of the cancer treatment they are receiving. We should aspire that progress in cardiooncology is able to track progress in oncology, and to ensure that the current 'one size fits all' approach to screening be obsolete in the very near future

DSMM XI study: dose definition for intravenous cyclophosphamide in combination with bortezomib/dexamethasone for remission induction in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma

A clinical trial was initiated to evaluate the recommended dose of cyclophosphamide in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone as induction treatment before stem cell transplantation for younger patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Thirty patients were treated with three 21-day cycles of bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 plus dexamethasone 40 mg on the day of bortezomib injection and the day after plus cyclophosphamide at 900, 1,200, or 1,500 mg/m2 on day 1. The maximum tolerated dose of cyclophosphamide was defined as 900 mg/m2. At this dose level, 92% of patients achieved at least a partial response. The overall response rate [complete response (CR) plus partial response (PR)] across all dose levels was 77%, with a 10% CR rate. No patient experienced progressive disease. The most frequent adverse events were hematological and gastrointestinal toxicities as well as neuropathy. The results suggest that bortezomib in combination with cyclophosphamide at 900 mg/m2 and dexamethasone is an effective induction treatment for patients with newly diagnosed MM that warrants further investigation

Adipocytes disrupt the translational programme of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia to favour tumour survival and persistence

The specific niche adaptations that facilitate primary disease and Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia (ALL) survival after induction chemotherapy remain unclear. Here, we show that Bone Marrow (BM) adipocytes dynamically evolve during ALL pathogenesis and therapy, transitioning from cellular depletion in the primary leukaemia niche to a fully reconstituted state upon remission induction. Functionally, adipocyte niches elicit a fate switch in ALL cells towards slow-proliferation and cellular quiescence, highlighting the critical contribution of the adipocyte dynamic to disease establishment and chemotherapy resistance. Mechanistically, adipocyte niche interaction targets posttranscriptional networks and suppresses protein biosynthesis in ALL cells. Treatment with general control nonderepressible 2 inhibitor (GCN2ib) alleviates adipocyte-mediated translational repression and rescues ALL cell quiescence thereby significantly reducing the cytoprotective effect of adipocytes against chemotherapy and other extrinsic stressors. These data establish how adipocyte driven restrictions of the ALL proteome benefit ALL tumours, preventing their elimination, and suggest ways to manipulate adipocyte-mediated ALL resistance

How to Simplify the Evaluation of Newly Introduced Chemotherapeutic Interventions in Myeloma

When the bortezomib [PS341], adriamycin and dexamethasone (PAD) regimen was first evaluated, the response rate in untreated patients was much superior to that elicited by conventional chemotherapeutic agents. We demonstrated the efficacy of PAD in relapsed or refractory patients by comparing the response rate obtained in 53 patients who received vincristine, adriamycin and dexamethasone (VAD) or equivalent regimen as induction therapy, using a comparative design in which each patient acted as their own control. Whereas 25 patients had a positive response to VAD, 37 patients had a response to PAD ≤ partial remission (PR) (p = 0.023). Using the more stringent response level of very good PR (VGPR) the results favored the PAD regimen very significantly (p = 0.006) (McNemars test). Similar results were seen using paired M-protein levels from individual patient comparisons. As the PAD regimen was subsequently adopted as the re-induction therapy in the British Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation/United Kingdom Myeloma Forum Myeloma X (Intensive) trial, now concluded, we have retrospectively analyzed the findings from both studies. Comparison of response rates and adverse effects of patients having had previous autologous transplantation (Cohort 1) with the corresponding data from Myeloma X showed close correlation. These findings provide evidence that rapid results may be obtained in the evaluation of newly introduced, and potentially highly effective, anti-tumour agents by direct comparison to the response to the immediately preceding standard regimen, particularly in relatively resistant tumours

Elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in RRMM: final overall survival results from the phase 3 randomized ELOQUENT-2 study

Prolonging overall survival (OS) remains an unmet need in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). In ELOQUENT-2 (NCT01239797), elotuzumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (ERd) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) in patients with RRMM and 1–3 prior lines of therapy (LoTs). We report results from the pre-planned final OS analysis after a minimum follow-up of 70.6 months, the longest reported for an antibody-based triplet in RRMM. Overall, 646 patients with RRMM and 1–3 prior LoTs were randomized 1:1 to ERd or Rd. PFS and overall response rate were co-primary endpoints. OS was a key secondary endpoint, with the final analysis planned after 427 deaths. ERd demonstrated a statistically significant 8.7-month improvement in OS versus Rd (median, 48.3 vs 39.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.82 [95.4% Cl, 0.68–1.00]; P = 0.0408 [less than allotted α of 0.046]), which was consistently observed across key predefined subgroups. No additional safety signals with ERd at extended follow-up were reported. ERd is the first antibody-based triplet regimen shown to significantly prolong OS in patients with RRMM and 1–3 prior LoTs. The magnitude of OS benefit was greatest among patients with adverse prognostic factors, including older age, ISS stage III, IMWG high-risk disease, and 2–3 prior LoTs

Randomized phase III study (ADMYRE) of plitidepsin in combination with dexamethasone vs. dexamethasone alone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

The randomized phase III ADMYRE trial evaluated plitidepsin plus dexamethasone (DXM) versus DXM alone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma after at least three but not more than six prior regimens, including at least bortezomib and lenalidomide or thalidomide. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive plitidepsin 5 mg/m2 on D1 and D15 plus DXM 40 mg on D1, D8, D15, and D22 (arm A, n = 171) or DXM 40 mg on D1, D8, D15, and D22 (arm B, n = 84) q4wk. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Median PFS without disease progression (PD) confirmation (IRC assessment) was 2.6 months (arm A) and 1.7 months (arm B) (HR = 0.650; p = 0.0054). Median PFS with PD confirmation (investigator’s assessment) was 3.8 months (arm A) and 1.9 months (arm B) (HR = 0.611; p = 0.0040). Median overall survival (OS, intention-to-treat analysis) was 11.6 months (arm A) and 8.9 months (arm B) (HR = 0.797; p = 0.1261). OS improvement favoring arm A was found when discounting a crossover effect (37 patients crossed over from arm B to arm A) (two-stage method; HR = 0.622; p = 0.0015). The most common grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (% of patients arm A/arm B) were fatigue (10.8%/1.2%), myalgia (5.4%/0%), and nausea (3.6%/1.2%), being usually transient and reversible. The safety profile does not overlap with the toxicity observed with other agents used in multiple myeloma. In conclusion, efficacy data, the reassuring safety profile, and the novel mechanism of action of plitidepsin suggest that this combination can be an alternative option in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma after at least three prior therapy lines